#169 - Personal Blog Evolution

The Woundup celebrated one year of sporadic blogging this past June 21. Happy Blogday to Me. Looking back, it's amusing to see what evolutionary paths this ol' blog has taken.

In the beginning, I simply enjoyed blogging for blogging's sake. Of course, like many who have recently reached this milestone, the election year had a lot to do with my early motivation: Kerry simply afforded far too many opportunities to become hyped about some silly thing or other. Bush had (and has) his share of silliness, but Kerry's was, ultimately, far more dangerous to our national concerns and security.

As I continued, however, it became obvious to me that what I really needed was a thematic approach. My brother tried it a few different ways before I finally figured out for myself what I needed. I needed an outlet for my Inner Dad.

"The Inner Dad" is a book that I've written. Don't bother Googling, it ain't out there. It sits on my hard drive in various formats, mostly written but in serious need of massaging. It dwells on the idea that, like Dave Barry's "guys," many men are Dads deep down - appearances to the contrary. As my blogging skills matured, I realized that many of the essays that I've written over the years really pointed to this idea of canonizing Dadhood, with only occasional forays into the realm of the screed. For that reason, the Woundup really is my political platform. It becomes the voice of my inner activist, a persona I tend to keep locked up tight in a small box in an even darker dungeon. I let him out only when I smell an issue on which I absolutely cannot remain quiet. Long live the Woundup.

The Woundup, therefore, is my link to the conservative world. It remains mindful that there are voices that would destroy everything for which I've worked - in my own way - to protect. I may not have defended my country while wearing a uniform, but I am a soldier of a sort. I refuse to simply sit back while those who are far less in tune with my needs attempt to sabotage my basic rights. It becomes my responsibility to raise my voice, even when that voice is occasionally trumped by far more eloquent ones - my brother among them.

For that reason, the Woundup has allied itself with the Bear Flag League. I may not agree word for word with everything they espouse, but then even among minorities I tend to be a minority. (I refer, of course, to the idea of being not only a white middle-aged male in an age where to be such is considered terribly un-PC, but to the fact that I am a white middle-aged Mormon male in an age where to be such is considered heretical, especially among many so-called "Christians". Go figure.) Still, the League is a platform where my views will engender somewhat less disdain than they would on, say, MoveOn.org.

This year figures to be an interesting one, politically. Not only are the lines being drawn early for the 2008 election, but California has a useless special election coming up. As soon as vacation is over, I plan to get uptight about that.

But not before then.

#168 - The ONLY Star Wars Review You'll Ever Need to Read

Move over Cam, Jen, and anyone else who has reviewed/panned/critiqued or otherwise written about the Star Wars empire at large. Dave Barry trumps you all!

#167 - My Last Ever Post Re: MJ

So, the Lame Duck of Pop has been exonerated in court. He's free to go. His rabid fans can go home and pretend to have lives again. The press can crawl back under their collective rocks. Doo dah, doo dah.

My only and final question would have to be: Has Mr. Jackson finally learned enough from this incident to be able to avoid even the appearance of evil?

I have my doubts.

#166 - Why I Don't Worry About MJ

Contrary to what the local media would have us believe, the Michael Jackson trial is not the biggest news item on our radars. I base this on my scientific survey of my immediate circle of friends and co-workers, none of whom ever even talk about the trial, other than to snort derisively and say, "Ol' Mr. Bad himself? Heh."

The MJ Trial™ has, of course, garnered its share of national media. After all, this is the self-styled "King of Pop" we're talking about. But the locals act as if there is no other news story worthy of our limited attentions. Every morning for the past several weeks I have heard no fewer than three reports connected with the trial, and on those mornings when they can get on-air interviews from someone connected - however remotely - with the trial, they have literal swooning fits in the studio. On days when other news simply won't be ignored, they grudgingly give it some air time ("Um, about 1,000 people were evacuated because of some landslide or other. No deaths."), then return to the trial as soon as they can politically swing it ("But, in other news, Michael Jackson was seen in court to actually nod off during his lawyer's summation! We'll talk with Legal Anal-ist S. O. Terrik to get his perspective on how this may affect the jury!").

This morning was, I must say, the best of breed in my opinion. Comedian/Activist/Nutritionist-to-the-Stars Dick Gregory was scheduled to be interviewed on the early-morning commute show on our local CBS affiliate. They got him on the phone, then waited for commercials to finish. When they were back on the air they tried to ask some questions, but Gregory wouldn't respond. They could hear breathing on the line, so they knew they were connected. Finally they sent the hotel manager up to knock on his door, only to learn that Gregory had been up late with MJ and had fallen fast asleep while waiting for the interview to start. No amount of coaxing could rouse him, so that interview will have to wait for another day (and, one hopes, a more caring audience).

Meanwhile, MJ's life continues to unfold as a spectacle worthy of the scandal rags that are making millions on the story. Poor stressed-out Jackson is in and out of medical care, being worried over by zealous parents and (gasp!) The High and Holy Almighty Right Reverend More Powerful Than God Jesse Jackson, who holds nightly prayer vigils with MJ. I presume he prays to himself as he seems to ignore the Lord's counsel in just about everything else.

So why worry? This trial has nothing (repeat: n-o-t-h-i-n-g) to do with me, my family, or even my casual acquaintances. MJ could spend the rest of his natural (natural??) life in jail and it wouldn't make one iota of difference in my life. He could be acquitted and spend the rest of his days being lampooned by the press and over-adored by his fans. What's different about that? Assuming he survives the trial, would he be forced into exile on some wasteland of a beach owned by dead movie stars? Good. Hasta la Bye-bye.

Oh, wait. There will be one difference for me: Like OJ before him, MJ will finally drop from the local media radar, and I won't have to listen to this stuff anymore.

Until the next superstar screws up.

#165 - Deep Thoughts About Deep Throat

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

#164 - Coiffure Blogging

Heh. Cam learns the economics of modern hair care.

Dude... why'd ya think I married my barber?

(Note to those who happen to be my barber: That's not the only reason I married you!)

#163 - One Must Occasionally Disappoint

Dear Newsweek,

I wanted to thank you properly for inviting me to join such an august body of subscribers. Recognizing the journalistic standards to which you hold, I am truly flattered to be offered your special "Professional Rate." I do, however, have a few questions.

First, judging by the rate itself, I'm guessing this rate is only offered to less than 5% of your total readership. Otherwise, I would be forced to suspect that the $20.00 annual fee you're offering me really means that your current mark-up is somewhere topping 1,000%, and I just know that can't be possible. I mean, honestly, how many rubes are there in this country who are willing to fork out $200 annually for your magazine?

Secondly, I refer to your list of "benefits." I appreciate the itemization, by the way. So nice to see a list of perceived benies without all the marketing hyperbole generally associated with such falsehoods.

For example, you state that this "introductory" rate is available to "professionals only." Really? Professional whats, may I ask? Now, granted, my company often refers to me as a "professional," but where on earth did you get hold of this information? Perhaps there is a publication titled "Professionals of America" in which I am featured. Could I trouble you for a copy? It would certainly help prove to my employer just how invaluable a resource I must be and could help me leverage a better raise.

Also, you offer a "Money-Back Guarantee" on all unmailed issues. Has this been a problem for you? I mean, I know we're only talking $20 here, but if delivery is a problem, why would I bother? None of my other magazines seems to have trouble getting here. Heaven knows, that includes the ones I never asked for!

Tell me more about this "Tax-Deductible Status" you offer if I use the magazine for business. Does that mean if I take the magazine in to work every week, I get to knock another $20 off my taxes? I must admit to being tempted. Must ponder this one further.

Finally, there's the promise of your special year-end double issue, "Who's Next." As a responsible consumer I can only ask, "Next for what?" I wish to take this opportunity to gently remind you of a small incident connected with less than savory reporting of a non-incident that consequently resulted in violence and death abroad. I'm sure you remember the one. The ominous sound of "Who's Next" calls to mind the stereotypical school yard bully who bloody's one child after another, then turns around with a maniacal glint in his eye and asks, "Who's next?" Dare I inquire as to whom you intend to mark for your next piece of irresponsibility? Myself, perhaps, for daring to question your journalistic integrity? One shudders at the mere thought.

No, on balance I'm afraid I must decline your most generous offer. I'm not much of a magazine reader these days. News magazines, to me, represent what might blithely be called "mainstream media," and, as such, are of questionable value. I blog, myself (terribly haute culture, you know) and find far better expressions of what today constitutes the bulk of my research into public affairs.

Sorry to let you down. Please feel free to pass this offer along to some poor lawyer who hasn't yet paid back his school loans.

Sincerely,

Woody

#162 - Friends in All the Wrong Places

Good thing: Having someone agree with me that the No Child Left unBrainwashed Act doesn't work.

Not-so-good thing: It's the American Federation of Teachers.

This is a little like saying the Cavalry should stop attacking the Injuns. Let's send in the Klan instead.

I have made no secret of my contempt for NCLB. The very idea that students must progress at the same rate determined by some panel of random experts has always been abhorrent to me. There is no such thing as a "one size fits all" education. Period. Branding a child as a failure (you can call them whatever you like, but that's the message they'll get) simply because they're not ready to adhere to your neat and tidy curriculum is, in my opinion, criminal. Those who concocted the Act to begin with need to be sent back a few grades and made to try again.

Parents, too, need to step back and take a macro look at what they're expecting their kids to do. Parents who are so eager to get their children into education-rich environments at the earliest possible ages may well miss so much of what makes childhood special for the kids. My daughters, for example, both read well beyond their current grade levels. In math, they're just about dead even with their relative ages. My (nearly) eight year old, though, occasionally exhibits the attention span of a flea when the course work gets a little intense. Imagine some teacher having this bouncing ball of energy in his or her classroom where other kids seem able to control their fanny-springs. She'd probably be evaluated for ADD or ADHD in today's academic environment. But I know my daughter. She's a lot like her Daddy, in fact. I had the same problem as a youngster, and it had nothing to do with any syndrome, real or imagined. I simply had a hyperactive imagination, and it manifested itself most prominently during the more boring parts of school. During those moments, school was truly in the way; an obstacle to be overcome. Unfortunately, since I wasn't becoming the little fact-spewing automaton the educators expected me to be, I spent a lot of time explaining my embarrassing report cards to Mom and Dad.

Those were the days!

My problem with having the AFT echo my sentiments regarding NCLB has nothing to do with the fact that these are teachers who are complaining. My problem is that this is a union of teachers who are complaining. Unions have no reason to exist other than to beg for money, then spend it all begging for more money. This is the way Congress creates budgets and tax codes, by the way. Also, unions always have an "agenda." "Agenda," as defined by the union, means "Keep yer nose, eyes, and ears out of my classroom, if you know what's good for you."

Also, the union does not generally represent the real personalities of many, many teachers I have known throughout my life.

Most teachers I know have genuine interests in bringing education to life for their students. They have a real love for the profession, and most go the extra mile for countless students every year. They are generally underpaid, overcrowded, and unappreciated. They hate the educational bureaucracy as much or more than we do. They despise the idea that they must continually return to school themselves - generally out of their own pockets - just so they can learn the latest new-fangled "theories" from professional academics who've never had to stand in front of a class of hyperactive 10 year olds and try to make learning about sentence diagramming more fun than, say, putting a huge semi-chewed wad of gum on the seat in front of them. They already know that the public education system in this country is broken, and they spend more time than we credit them thinking about how to fix it.

The unions do no such thing. They already know the answer to the problem, and that answer requires money. Your money. My money. The teachers' money. And their "agenda." Whatever that may be.

Well, thanks, AFT, for supporting me on this issue. Do me a favor, though. If you want to ask for my help, just back slooowly away from my wallet.

#161 - Many Happy Returns!

Way Off Bass turned one on the Blogospheric Calendar yesterday!

Although he is my younger brother, he's always been of the quicker mind and it surprises me not at all that he's been a few steps ahead of me as a blogger. In fact, my younger bro happens to be my BlogFather. Go figure.

So, Happy Blogiversary, Cam! Whatever form your blogging takes in the future, know that it will always be extremely important to at least one segment of your audience.

#160 - Utah: Love It or Hate It

Y'know, if it weren't for those danged crazy Mormons infesting all of Utah, I'd move there in a heartbeat.

Seriously, if you happened to catch "Cold Case" on the tube last night, you'd know by now just how crazy we must be. Our men all suffer from military attitudes. We apparently force our young people to wear temple garments despite the fact that a) they're too young to wear them, and b) they have no real idea why. Our moral strictness apparently forces youngsters into amoral dementia by teaching them that sex is evil, until you're married. This naturally sends young men into delusional "god told me she was dirty" killing sprees.

So, without question, I keep Utah in my hip pocket.

The "hip pocket" position is one of the first negotiation tactics you learn in business. Always go in with a fall-back plan. Something to whip out when your first plan just isn't going to work. I must note, for the record, that I am a lousy negotiator. For one thing, I have daughters. Anyone who happened to read "Non Sequitur" today will instantly know to what I refer. Also, I tend to freeze up when dealing with forceful personalities, such as car salesmen and other members of the leech family. This is why Mrs. Woody is our designated vehicle buyer. My hip-pocket position usually consists of trying to get out of the financing office with one of my two remaining shirts still in my possession.

"So, why," you ask, trying desperately to get me back to my original point, "do you consider Utah to be a 'hip-pocket' position?"

Good question. To answer this, I point you to a recent article on "Homeschoolbuzz.com" regarding a new law recently enacted in Utah.

The original bill was sponsored by a freshman state senator by the name of Madsen. Sen. Madsen had a child who had reached the age where he would need to start filing exemptions with his local school district before being able to teach the child at home. Sen. Madsen tells of thinking that, hey, this law is a tad vague, and decided thereupon to research it. The result is this law that shields homeschooling parents from having to meet state credentialing criteria, or having to submit to standardized testing.

This, in conjunction with Utah's recent knock-down of Bush's No Child Left Unbrainwashed, er, Behind, makes the Deseret State my hero. Well, and Sen. Madsen, too.

In fact, that law alone would make Utah an extremely powerful draw if California continues to harrass homeschoolers the way some families have been made to suffer in recent months. We've been fortunate to fly just under everyone's radar so far; filing our R4 affidavits like the good, law-abiding citizens we are. But it wouldn't take much to make me give moving to Utah serious consideration if the California EduNazis somehow succeed in overriding my constitutional rights.

I've always admired Utah's devotion to parent-directed education, and this really just clinches it for me.

------------------------------

An aside to the writers of last night's "Cold Case" episode: Try doing a little research, guys, before tossing your ignorance out there for all the world to see. As one old philosopher once noted: Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and erase all doubt.

Sheesh. What a market you could have had.

#159 - Our Fathers' Sorrows

With apologies in advance, but only for having rambling thoughts.

Via Michelle Malkin comes this story of a middle school in Colorado that found themselves listening to a somewhat modified version of the Pledge of Allegiance. A guidance counselor at the school, no doubt having the best of intentions, changed the phrase "one nation, under God" to read "one nation, under your belief system."

Nice out.

The debate about the importance of God to this country is, of course, old news. One can only imagine how the founding fathers must feel. I'm guessing they frequently hang their heads in shame every time we feel a need as a nation to apologize for believing in God.

It's easy - perhaps too easy - to blame the atheists for this. Certainly they made it a battleground when they launched law suits to have God removed from as many public venues as possible. Still, except for a few shining voices, the believers largely let them get away with it.

Political correctness is, in fact, a symptom of a much more ravaging illness. A cancer of such magnitude that it threatens to destroy every quality of life for which our forefathers fought in every war since the Revolution. One of our most basic rights is the right to worship in any way that we may choose, without fear of government interference, and yet we abdicate that right every time we allow some humanist to strike the word "God" from public view.

I suppose, if I were to give atheists the benefit of the doubt, that there may be some genuine offense taken in hearing the name of God invoked in public. Certainly Cain took offense. In fact, he got so tired of hearing it that he destroyed the life of his brother and made himself an outcast for the rest of his existence. But I don't remember hearing about any apology from Adam. "Sorry, Cain. I know we never understood your need to disbelieve in our Creator, and you'll never hear us mention him again." Show me that scripture, and I'll buy into the atheistic argument.

The very amendment that guarantees freedom of speech as well as freedom to worship also implies a right to never have to apologize for having faith in God. Why should we? What is it that seems to be so offensive to so many today?

Probably it is the aspect of personal accountability that galls them. "One nation, under God" implies that this country - rightly - is founded on laws that have their roots in Judeo-Christian tradition. The laws that demand respect of other peoples' civic rights are squarely in synch with revealed law from God himself. We cannot and should not force others to believe in God, but neither should we feel compelled to shut our mouths in public lest we be accused of offending others because of God. Those who would live a life free from personal accountability risk having their freedoms severely curtailed by literally throwing them away. Certain things are still illegal in this country, and living a life without accountability ultimately leads to those illegal acts. Those who somehow manage to escape that accountability in this life will have that much more to account for in the life to come.

There is a basic argument that says that those who don't appreciate this country are free to leave it. I personally have found that argument to be somewhat harsh. I have lived outside the country. I fully recognize the blessing it is to live in this constitutional republic. I know how repressive other governments can be and often are. I suppose there is also a temptation to ask those who feel offended by basic Christian beliefs to simply close their ears, but that argument, too, is harsh.

Most of us who profess belief and faith in a living God feel absolutely no need to apologize for believing the way we do. In fact, it offends us when someone forces us, practically at gunpoint, to close our mouths and worship in silence.

Make no mistake: a revolution awaits. It will come when society has degraded itself sufficiently that the only way to go is up. Life will have become so wearisome that knowledge of a loving God will be a healing balm.

A knowledge for which I will refuse to apologize.

#158 - Giving Me Gas... [Updated]

Our summer will disappoint this year, I'm afraid. We usually look forward to summers if only because we have a chance to take a week or two and travel around with our little family. There for awhile we alternated between our friends up in Washington state and family in Utah. Last year we decided to putz around the mountain regions of northern California, admiring the beauty of Mount Shasta (while worrying about the decided lack of water in Shasta Lake) and surrounding areas.

This year, I'm thinking our big destination will be the local putt-putt and pizza palace.

It's not that I'm complaining, but it isn't as if the country has had little or no warning about these pesky fuel costs. I was a new driver during the "Energy Crisis" of the late 70's and had to spend a few days at our local gas stations. We slowly inched our way around the block waiting for our turn (wouldn't you know both of our vehicles had odd numbered license plates!) to put some go-juice in our go-buggies. Every time we did, we lost several hours of life sitting in those cars, softly swearing at some faceless organization called "OPEC" and wondering when Detroit was ever going to get a clue.

Thirty years and about a gazillion SUVs later, we're still clueless. We still choose to ignore those who warn against our dependence on foreign oil, and laugh at those who tout alternative fuels for a commute-happy society. Worse, we threaten to find creative ways to punish those who dare to purchase energy efficient vehicles, because some poor politician isn't getting enough money to waste on highway maintenance projects. (If you've ever seen a CalTrans road project, you know that "efficient" is not allowed in the current bargaining unit agreement.)

With the cost of gasoline steadily creeping upward (we're pushing the $3.00 ceiling here in sunny southern Cal!), the next voices I expect to hear would come from the various tourism boards across the country. I, for one, will likely not be taking my family very far from Orange County this year. I've done the math, and even my easy-on-the-mileage Saturn will be too expensive for anything but day trips. If even 10% of the families who normally find some way of travelling elsewhere for vacation find themselves in a similar situation, I predict a few ghost towns increasing their spiritual populations by summer's end.

Me? I'm not getting into this debate. I can't really afford to do anything but wait it out and either buy an alternative-fueled vehicle when I can next afford one (retirement, I'm thinking), or save up for five years at a time so we can take two more travelling vacations before the girls get too old to enjoy them.

Yeah, it's that bad.

UPDATE: So Mrs. Woody and I were budgeting for our vacation this year, when Mrs. Woody hit on the idea of checking into the train. (Note: the Coast Starlight is not suffering from brake trouble these days)

Turns out that travelling by train actually saves us over the cost of gas, hotels and food that we would pay for the trip up and back. So, odd as it may sound, saved by Amtrak!

#157 - Death Watch du Jour

It's been interesting to note how the world reacts to death. Or, I should say, it's interesting to note how the media wants us to see how the world reacts.

With Terri Schiavo there appeared to be a huge following of people who wanted - desperately - to empathize with her suffering. Not the brain damage, mind you. It was the family struggle that seemed to spur most people into one corner or another. I, for one, cannot for the life of me figure out why her husband was so dead-set against handing care of his wife over to her parents, who certainly seemed perfectly willing to handle her care and keeping for the rest of her natural life. It has made absolutely no sense to me.

Then again, I'm a little worried about letting the judicial system handle this sort of problem. Worse still was having Congress turn it into a political statement. No; circus, really. If the issue boiled down to the argument of whether a given person has the "right" to die, please let the participants be those who can still speak for themselves. Making Terri the poster child for this issue violated her right to suffer privately. There was no reason to parade her through the public square in order to press a point.

Has my mind been made up on all of these points? Absolutely not. As I mentioned before, there but for grace...

Unfortunately, any time the media gets involved in these affairs, the whole spectacle reminds me of vultures circling some wretched animal just before the final blow. Reporters swoop in and out like so many scavengers, making what they hope to heaven is a profound statement on the human "angle" of the story, then riding the crest to yet another journalistic prize. Terri lies dying while the J-school knock-offs make their marks on the story. Watching the reporting of this tragedy has reminded me forcefully of the reporters in "The Right Stuff" who were always accompanied by the sound of plague-carrying insects. How appropriate.

Even with the passing of a spiritual leader, such as the Pope, the circus changes nothing but the tent. Same tired acts, new tent.

I'll grant you that the passing of a Pope is of great interest to me. The Catholic church has fascinated me for decades as an academic study, and I'm very much interested in watching the process of selecting a new Pontiff as it unfolds. Succession in the LDS church is nothing if not predictable, and there's nothing political about it. That's why it intrigues me to watch a religion deal with its own political issues in something as significant as choosing its next spiritual head.

In the meantime, rather than merely report on the failing condition and eventual passing of a great man, the media had to turn it into Death Watch du Jour. The ticket hawkers sat pompously at their anchor desks and barked for everyone's attention. "Getcher front row seats right here! Witness the gripping drama! Watch bereaved Catholics everywhere! And don't forget: we still have a chance to sway church policy about such media-critical issues as women in the priesthood and gay marriage!"

Oh, yeah. Couldn't forget that.

So now the death watch has turned into a social-issues watch. Terri and John Paul II are dead.

Long live their controversies.

#156 - Cooley Doesn't Get It

Steve Cooley might well be a terrific lawyer. I have no idea, personally, and don't much care since I no longer live in Los Angeles County. I remember his campaign for LA County District Attorney being somewhat aggressive as he attempted - successfully - to cast former LACDA Ira Reiner in a "soft on criminals" light. Beyond that, I have no idea as to his qualifications for the job.

This has nothing to do with those qualifications.

What Cooley has done is worthy of the most contemptible politician. This is classic "biting the hand that feeds you" material. After the highly publicized trial of actor Robert Blake ended in acquittal on all but one count (deadlocked 11 to 1 for acquittal on that count), Cooley made a public statement that the jurors in that case were "incredibly stupid."

My hero.

Now, for the record, District Attorneys generally don't go to trial unless they feel they have a case. Certainly, Cooley and his staff must have felt like they could not only make the case, but sell it to the jury as well. As trials go, it was remarkable for it's lack of behind-the-scenes drama. In fact, there wasn't a single case of juror misconduct and the judge made note of that fact in thanking both the jury and the alternates. By all accounts they were attentive, and their deliberations left no doubt that they were considering everything entered into evidence.

So, Mr. Cooley, tell us how this doesn't sound like sour grapes?

The foreman made an excellent point in one interview. He said that comments like Mr. Cooley's only serve to cool prospective jurors' interest in future trials, and it's going to get harder and harder to seat an objective jury. That's not a good thing when you consider the number of people today who go out of their way to avoid jury duty. All they need to know now is that any disagreement with the District Attorney's office will forever brand them as "incredibly stupid."

That, Mr. Cooley, is no way to define our constitutional system of justice. The system worked in this case, and it worked well. I don't necessarily believe Mr. Blake was any more innocent than you apparently do, but I also know that your office did not do the job they were paid to do. They did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that Blake pulled that trigger. Period.

Care to denigrate someone's intelligence, Mr. Cooley? Talk to the mirror.

#155 - Careful Neutrality

There are reasons why I have not sounded off on the Terri Schiavo case to date. Primary among them is the simple fact that I'm not there and have no right to impose my judgement based on facts as they've been reported by others. I am not the woman's husband, nor her parent, and it is impossible for me to say how I might act were this my wife or one of my daughters. I can speculate, of course, but that's all it would amount to. Speculation.

The stories, images and sounds that have so captured everyone's attention these past months have been carefully crafted by those who have strong opinions on either side of the question. Yesterday I heard one expert talk about Terri's vegetative state and how she truly is not there. This morning I heard the story of one woman who was diagnosed with persistent vegetative state and recovered. We are meant to see every shred of hope held by the grieving parents, and every plea for dignity and quality of life made by the husband. We are also meant to see the parents as deluded souls who are desperate to save their daughter, and the husband as some sort of monster who wishes to snuff out this woman's life for purely selfish reasons.

Who among us, though, is truly qualified to make these judgements?

Not me. As I pass through life, even with a strong understanding of the eternal nature of man and God's plan for his mortal children, there are events for which there is no possible preparation. Not direct preparation, I should say. When I took my new wife by the hand and placed the ring on her finger, did I know for which trials I should prepare? Of course not. The things that may happen (and even many that have already happened) are not written down in a book somewhere that I can read. There are no telegrams that tell me that one of my children is about to require surgery, or that I might become incapacitated and unable to provide for my family sometime soon.

How, then, can I possibly adjudicate the actions and opinions of a family that has been thrust into that position?

I can't. Especially when you consider that, no matter what I may feel about the facts of this case today, I very probably would change my mind were I suddenly placed in that position myself. Were I the husband or father in this case, I would probably -- even irrationally -- hold onto every glimmer of hope, even if all medical evidence or opinion told me that no hope was possible. Even if my wife and I had talked about such things and agreed in advance not to prolong such suffering, I would probably have second thoughts.

I would have to consider not only the mortal consequences of my decisions, but all the eternal consequences as well. I would be in constant communication with my Bishop and other church leaders. I would be on my knees just as constantly. Even then, I have no idea whether I would have strength enough to either pull the plug, or hold on until the inevitable end. How can I possibly predict what I would do or how I would feel?

I understand and respect every opinion expressed by those who have such obviously strong feelings about this story. I, for one, will not be quick to judge anyone who sides either with the parents or the husband.

I merely pray that God will be merciful to all parties concerned: the husband, the parents, all those who support one or the other.

And, of course, Terri.

#154 - Of Codes and Wizards

I worry about people sometimes. I really do.

Two books (well, one book and one franchise, if you will) sit firmly atop my list of Books Most Overreacted To. It's quite an honor, to be sure, but the winners will not be notified anytime soon. I'm certain the authors are a little busy these days defending themselves against the scurrilous charges that put them on my list in the first place. Or, more probably, they're laughing themselves silly wondering what all the fuss is about.

Harry Potter (five published, one coming soon, and one to go) qualifies as the franchise. The primary reason I began reading the books, of course, was all the hullabaloo being raised by certain Christian groups claiming that Harry Potter was nothing less than a tool of the devil, encouraged devil worship, and would somehow convert millions of innocent children to the celebration of Wiccan. Or something. I tuned it out so long ago that the details have become a bit hazy in my memory.

What Harry Potter really is depends on one's point of view. Mine says it's a wonderful introduction into a world of fantasy that places it on par with my old childhood favorite Oz series by L. Frank Baum. Others may (and do) disagree to varying degrees, but to insist that these books are dangerous is silly. A knee-jerk reaction to a perfectly harmless story line.

Naturally, there will always be those who carry devotion to such stories to dangerous extremes. I feel confident that we may dismiss most of these as people who would be just as likely to believe everything they read in the National Enquirer.

The second book on my list is "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown. As usual, I waited for awhile to read it. When I did, I thoroughly enjoyed it.

WARNING TO THOSE WHO HAPPEN TO BE MRS. WOODY: Mild spoiler follows! (She hasn't read it, yet)

I will grant you that, from a doctrinal perspective, some of the points raised are troublesome. Those who believe that the Savior was never married, especially to Magdalene, are most passionate in their faith. I have no argument with those beliefs since I, myself, was raised with them. What I can't understand, however, is why a book that is clearly labelled a novel would be considered so dangerous to people of faith.

Of course, as a Latter-day Saint I've had to endure my share of literature that is - shall we say? - less than complimentary to my religion. I generally find such writing to be reprehensible and, in some cases, downright libelous. A lifetime of dealing with such writings has taught me to simply ignore them. The good ol' First Amendment says that I really can't prevent such nonsense, so I just won't rise to the bait.

Taken at a different level, how different is this book from just about 99% of all movies and TV shows written today that will either take the Lord's name in vain, mock those who believe in him, or teach us how much better it must be to worship sex and money?

The primary difference, in my mind, is the entertainment value.

As stories go, "The Da Vinci Code" really doesn't go out of its way to mock, blaspheme, or even resort to profanity. No more than any other novel I could think of these days, anyway. It's a good yarn with plenty of red herrings and plot twists to keep one guessing right up until the end. I can see where some sensitive souls might take umbrage with Brown's depictions of Catholic beliefs and practices. Still, were I as sensitive as some seem to be, I would never have gotten past Doyle's first Sherlock Holmes novel "A Study in Scarlet," where Mormons are grossly misrepresented both as to beliefs as well as hierarchy within the Priesthood. Scandalous! And yet, I love the stories. All of them. "A Study in Scarlet" merely makes me chuckle during the more sensational parts.

Even if, by some chance, the allegations made in "The Da Vinci Code" happen to be true, that wouldn't necessarily mean that the documents alluded to had any real historical value anyway. Forgery is, perhaps, the third oldest profession, and such hoaxes have been around from the time of Adam.

Fear not, believers. The end is nigh.

The end of this post, that is.

#153 - On the Carl's Jr. Wagon

Every once in a great while, we find something that just hits us completely the wrong way. So much so, in fact, that we feel a need to lodge a protest. The problem is, I'm not a protester. I don't like confrontation and really despise the idea of getting in anyone's face. I barely have room enough for the face I was born with, let alone someone else's. Besides, I don't know where that thing's been...

Some few truly choice entities, however, can still raise my hackles. Quickly. Like the RNC, for example. Most of the time I can ignore them, just as they ignore me. Until they need money. Then they're all over me. "Mr. Woody," they say, "you know we really can't get the job done unless we have every ounce of your disposable income in order to tell everyone why they need to vote for whoever our candidate is this election as opposed to that scumbag pinko commie Diss-ocrat that gets all of his or her money directly from Hollywood. How much may we soak you for?"

Then there are people who advertise on TV.

For some reason, Madison Avenue (I assume it's still Madison Avenue... it's been a few years since I paid any attention!) has lately felt compelled to create ads that push the envelope of poor taste. In fact, the more offensive the punch line, the better for the ad execs and sponsors. Case in point tonight: Carl's Jr.

I've not been a fan of their advertising for quite some time now, beginning with those lovely, mouth-watering images of the glop dripping down onto some athlete's smelly gym shoes. Yummy! And hygienic! But now, they've violated every pregnant woman in America by shoving a camera up into previously private recesses (except for National Geographic, Nova, and a few score books on the subject) to hear the rantings of a neo-homeboy talking about "busting out" and "taking some of this with me" (as he grabs a handful of placenta). Yeah. I want a kid like that in my home. And, oh, by the way, guess I'd better go patronize Carl's Jr. so any future unborn generations won't hold things against me.

So, once again, Carl's Jr. (and they're by no means the only offenders in today's market) have seen fit to alienate my particular demographic (middle-aged men and women who happen to treasure thoughtful exchanges between parents and their offspring) and perpetuate the idea that the only attitude that sells today is the in-yo-face variety.

My heros.

Hence our boycott.

We do not ask - nor do we expect - anyone to join us. Ours will be a silent protest. We will simply refuse to eat Carl's Jr. food until the offensive advertising is eradicated. Which, I suspect, means that I have now gone cold turkey on Carl Karcher Enterprises.

So, gee, really sorry about ruining a booming economy for everyone. Really, I am. But a man's gotta make a stand.

I plan to make mine upwind from Carl's. The smell is starting to nauseate me.

#152 - *sigh* Bill Doesn't Understand Us

Interesting topic over at INDC Journal. Bill's original post dealt with moderates in the GOP feeling a need to bolt if right-wingers (I be self-professed!) don't turn down the heat on a few of our talking points. He uses Roe v. Wade and gay marriage as his catalytic points, mentioning that if we keep harping about total bans on [choose your controversy], we just may drive moderates out of the party and into the arms of some other party.

As always, we on the right remind our esteemed moderate brethren that (for me anyway) it's not really about the party. The GOP may come or go with the tide for all I care. I've already documented my disdain for their inability to use whatever money they milk out of the party faithful every election cycle wisely. Certainly there are things that President Bush has implemented during his administration of which I am less than fond. I even feel that, though I don't believe Social Security was constitutionally appropriate when FDR ramrodded it through Congress, we shouldn't be trying now to "fix" it by monkeying with it the way Bush proposes. I guess that makes me atypical, but "typical" isn't what I strive for.

As a so-called "Christian conservative," it is my personal tenets which drive my political choices and not a need to see one party or the other "in power." Those tenets have far greater control over who I am and how I live than any government ever could. In fact, if the man (or woman) in the Oval Office is honorable and sticks to his/her constitutional limits, I could care less whether they be Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or worse.

Do I have my own social agenda? Certainly. Will I fight against those issues that Bill wishes I'd leave alone? You bet. Am I doing it to spite Bill and his fellow mods?

No, sir. I am not.

I despise Roe v. Wade not so much because it made abortion legal, but because it made abortion the thing to do when a mistake is made. Society suddenly, seemingly overnight, turned abortion from a whispered, emotionally and physically torturous procedure to a nearly casual afterthought - as if destroying a young life is no big deal. That's what I wish had never happened. As a Christian, I've been taught that all life is sacred, and that we take life only in defense of our safety, or to fulfill the requirements of justice where warranted. Most abortions satisfy neither parameter.

Gay marriage is, by all spiritual measures, denied by the heavens. Of course, politics long ago removed itself from spiritual boundaries by creating a wall between the state and God that the founders - especially Thomas Jefferson - never intended to impose. Jefferson himself would never have supported legalization of gay marriage in this country. But, more to the point for those of us on the right, it flies in the face of everything we have learned through centuries of study of God's laws. The eternal ones, not the woefully inadequate human ones imposed by legislators. That's why we oppose gay marriage.

Does that mean that I abandon the party if it suddenly supports these things? Not necessarily. As it usually happens in any election, it boils down to choosing the lesser among evils. Sad, but generally true. You can legalize abortion, gay marriage, insider trading, or any number of things. I will, of course, vote against them every time they come to a vote. But should society prevail and impose these things on me, I can still choose not to participate. This is the beauty of life in this country. I can not only not participate, but I can teach my future generations not to support them, either. Making a thing legal does not make it compulsory by any means. (Should compulsory language be introduced, I would, of course, immediately spearhead a recall of the idiots that introduced it!) So far, the First Amendment protects me in my desire to speak out (and teach) against these and other issues.

So, Bill, you have little to fear, at least from this particular right-winger. I won't flail against your opinions. We can agree to disagree.

On some things, anyway.

#151 - Tally Ho!

Utah is leading the charge to turn our collective backs on President Bush's No Child Left Behind program.

It's about time.

I tend not to form strong opinions about most domestic policies, largely because I'm not that smart. I have always figured that if I were smart enough to fisk a government program, I might as well run the silly government while I'm at it.

However, as a parent I have always been concerned with whatever direction our education gurus appear to be pointed. Generally speaking, it's always the wrong one. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is no exception.

The basic premise of the Act appears good on its surface. Leave no one behind. Make sure everyone graduates with all the right skills and knowledge. Just as we don't leave a wounded Marine in the field, neither do we leave kids without all the tools they need to succeed in life. Quel noble.

The problem is - and has always been - in the assumption that kids can be made to learn at the same pace as their classmates. Just as "one size fits all" is a lie, so "one pace fits all" is likewise. A lie. A scam. A farce.

Exhibit A is my son. My ex-wife and I had decided early on to homeschool him. Try as we might, he just wouldn't get interested in reading. There was no question about his intelligence. All his other skills were right where they should have been by any reasonable measure. He just wasn't interested in reading.

As our marriage began its sunset, we realized that our son would have to go to public school. We were worried about how it would be perceived that a second grader had such sub-standard reading skills as he seemed to be exhibiting. Then, very suddenly, he started picking up the books and almost literally overnight became a voracious reader. Had he actually been in a public school before that happened, we would have been subjected to all sorts of testing, conferencing, and angst over his perceived non-performance. In fact, he was just waiting for his interest level to catch up with his skills. He actually could read, he just didn't want to.

NCLB, in this case, would have caused a lot of grey hair for no good reason.

The Woodyettes are another fine example. Here we have two youngsters who love to learn. They love the fact that Mommy is their teacher, and Mommy (an ex-teacher herself) loves teaching them. They have lots of fun together. The girls constantly amaze me with their progress. Reading is no exception.

Mrs. Woody settled on Hooked on Phonics for her curriculum and the older Woodyette went to work toward the end of her Kindergarten year. A year later, she was reading the first Harry Potter book by herself. Daddy was blown away. Mommy just wears that smug smile of a parent who knows her kids. Interestingly, while we hadn't planned on starting her quite so soon, the younger Woodyette began - on her own - to pick up on what her big sister had done. NCLB wouldn't have done that for my girls. Mommy did that because it was a natural progression for them, and they demonstrated that they were ready.

I'm pleased to see states demonstrate the kind of backbone required to snub the Feds. Shucks, if I thought California was capable of putting together a responsible and comprehensive education program, I'd even support higher state taxes to offset the loss of federal money. They're not, so I don't, but I can dream.

In the meantime, NCLB is dead. Long live NCLB. Now, let's move on to a program that works. For a change.

#150 - America's Choir? Sure, But...

Kris Wright over at By Common Consent wonders about the Mormon Tabernacle Choir and its somewhat recent cognomen of "America's Choir." The question is essentially asked (as I interpret it, anyway), "Why would a choir that represents a religion that was for years oppressed by its own country suddenly become a masthead for that very country?"

Based on some highly cynical comments that followed the post, it might appear that some members of the church somehow feel that the choir is not only representative of some high-level church-wide hypocrisy, but incompetent as a choir to boot. I'd like to address myself to the cynics.

Goodness. Where to start?

One cannot discuss the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints without discussing its musical heritage. From the very first revelation directing Emma Smith to compile our first hymn book, the Lord has made it crystal clear that music is an integral part of the gospel. Music - by which I mean uplifting and edifying music - is said by the Lord himself to be equivalent to prayer. Prayer, as understood by Latter-day Saints, is the highest form of communication of which man is capable. Would that not by extension place music at the same level?

I have been a Church "musician" since my youth. I have both sung in and directed choirs at ward and stake levels since I was seventeen. I have served as chorister in Sunday School (pre-bloc, of course!), Sacrament, and Priesthood. I have served as a music chairman in wards and stakes throughout my adult life. I have learned through long experience that worship without music is dry. Worship with music that doesn't quite fit the Lord's pattern is actually worse. I've learned that there's a reason why we need revelation in the Church, and the music we sing or listen to in our services and conferences is a prime example.

Whatever appellation it may acquire or assume over time, the Tabernacle Choir serves a few primary purposes: Along with providing the music for the general meetings of the Church, it also serves as an example to choirs throughout the Church as to the music that ought to be performed. (Yes, I know. How many wards have their own orchestra? On the other hand, how many sacrament meetings have you attended where a couple of violins accompanied the choir?) The other primary purpose of the choir, of course, is missionary work. The choir is one of the most effective missionary tools the Church has at its disposal, and members of the choir are, in effect, serving as missionaries. Only those who are spiritually defiant will fail to be moved when listening to the choir, especially in person. They teach by the Spirit.

As for its technical prowess, the choir has improved dramatically through the successive efforts of its conductors. I've been following the choir since the days of Condie. The improvement in the choir was remarkable under Ottley's leadership, and it has become even more technically proficient under Jessop's baton. So the occasional word may be mumbled. Try getting 12 voices to sing a true pianissimo and you'll appreciate just how well the Tab Choir does with 360 in a hall that seats 21,000.

Several years ago, Mom and I had an opportunity to sing with the Tab Choir as part of a guest choir for Music and the Spoken Word. What a neat experience that was! Most gratifying was having a chance to visit with Choir members and realize that they are, first and foremost, humble members of a worldwide Church. They have testimonies of the gospel and a desire to share a talent with which they've been blessed with the rest of the world. Bro. Ottley still had the baton, and he, too, was very gracious in conversation.

In the end, the name "America's Choir" is really just marketing. An affectionate nickname that shows how highly regarded the choir is in its native country. A reminder that even though they represent the Lord's restored Church, they are also American citizens and proud to be so. On the other hand, its recent worldwide tours should also amply demonstrate the love people feel for this group wherever it may be heard. As an American I may feel justifiably proud of this Choir and its music. As a Latter-day Saint, I appreciate this Choir for bringing me closer to God.

Here's an idea: Show your ward choir that you appreciate them, too. After all, they serve the same purposes for you that the Tab Choir serves for the entire Church. They may or may not be the best musicians the Church has to offer. They may not even have a bucket with a handle big enough to carry the tunes. But they love the gospel enough to offer those prayers on your behalf. Thank them for that the next time they sing. You'll make their day.

#149 - Controversy at the Academy? Really?

Via Drudge:

Chris Rock "clarified" his previous statement about straight men not watching the Oscars. Thank goodness.

Rock stuck to his guns. "I really don't know any straight men who aren't in show business that have ever watched the Oscars," he said.

Dead on, Chris. Haven't watched more than a few minutes of the show since I was a kid, I believe. Even then I realized just how politically and socially self-serving the entire industry really was.

As for Mr. Rock, I've never watched or heard his stuff. Simple imperative, really. His reputation preceeded him.

#148 - Weeping For Joy

(H/T: Drudge)

This has got to be the nicest thing the Democrats have ever done for the country. If ever a chairman of the DNC could torpedo his party's chances of running this country, Dean is that chair.

Dean appeals to that liberal fringe of the party that helped them lose so handily in the last election. The ones who were so dead-set against anything smacking of centrism that they spent the entire election insulting anyone who dared believe differently from themselves.

I neither know, nor do I care, what most Dems think of this development. Typically, in my world anyway, party chairs have little or no influence on my political thinking. Heck, I'm not altogether sure I could even name the RNC chair. All I know is that sometime in 2006, this is the idiot who will be choking my mailbox with pleas for my money. Money they neither need nor know what to do with. I will, of course, be dropping those letters directly into my interactive round file. The one with the shredder attached.

Dean will, of course, be doing the same for the Dems. He will light fires under those same Hollywood luminaries whom we as Republicans are publicly thanking today just in time for the Academy Awards. And in the meantime, we can all expect to be treated to the following platitudes, ad nauseum:

"We only have one way to go, and that's up," Georgia delegate Lonnie Platt said.

You'll need a loooong ladder.

"We are trying so hard to be like Republicans and we're not. I think Howard Dean says clearly that we are different," Cusack said. "We are the party of ordinary citizens and not the elite, we are everyday working folk."

Ordinary, non-elitist, everyday working left-wing liberals. Remember which Democrats the Deanites will be playing to.

At the end of the day, Dean can do nothing more than play the old shell game. It's all about perception, and if you can swing the perception in your favor, that's what you do. Fortunately for us on the right side of the spectrum, he's telegraphing his moves:

Dean told Democratic committee members Friday that it's important to learn to be more comfortable discussing the party's core values.

"The way I hope to deal with that problem, is not to abandon our core principles, but talk about them in a different way," he said.

Democrats are not pro-abortion, but "we are the party in favor of allowing women to make up their own minds about their health care," Dean, a physician, said.

Democrats are not for gay marriage, but "we are the party that has always believed in equal rights under the law for all people," he said.

"We are the party of moral values," Dean said. "There is nothing moral about cutting 300 million dollars that is used to feed starving children."

Neither is there anything moral about killing unborn babies for convenience, dissolving the institution of marriage, or talking about morals without having any.

Let the games begin.

P.S. Did I mention the relative morality of a party that fights harder for the protection of their pets than their unborn children? Didn't want to forget that...

#147 - Thus Spake the Poet

My brother is a serious poet. For all his chuff and bluster, his poetry does a better job of revealing his true nature than does his rapier wit. And that's saying something.

I hesitate to offer interpretations of efforts like this latest offering. First, it's difficult to know exactly what was in the author's head when he wrote it. I may (and have in the past) miss the point completely. Also, even if I'm right, interpreting such work somehow diminishes its impact. It's a little like watching a movie for the first time, only to have some idiot behind you tell you not only what's coming, but why the director chose to portray it a certain way.

So, with as little interpretation as possible, I encourage you to read this indictment of modern-day Holland. From noble past to reprehensible present, it's a neat encapsulation of what I consider to be the Dutch Deformation.

Well done, Bro.

#146 - "Arrest of the [insert chronological unit here]"

More years ago than anyone cares to think about, sports reporters on local and national sports shows began "Athlete Arrest of the Week" features. The title varied, of course, from reporter to reporter, but the substance was the same. Far too many professional (and not a few amateur) athletes were getting arrested on a variety of charges, up to and including murder. It may have seemed like a joke in the beginning, but courts quickly began working overtime to handle these celebrity cases.

After hearing about yet another teacher being arrested for chicanery of one kind or another involving one or more students today, I decided to see just how many other stories of this kind were currently being reported across the country. The answer is depressing.

Following is a list of teachers who have been arrested sometime in the last couple of months. In all fairness, none of these has, to my knowledge anyway, been tried and convicted, so innocence is still presumed. Still, the fact that these represent a mere fraction of the stories found on Google News is sobering. Any one of these charges, if true, carries with it not only the censure called for by law, but also the potential for ruining the lives of the individuals involved.

I really don't think I want to feature a "Teacher Arrest of the Day" as a regular part of this blog, but I wanted you to know that I've already got the material to do it. Yes, I'm a homeschooler, but this is not about some smug arrogance on my part. This is about warning parents to watch out for their kids. The list of people with whom we can safely entrust them is growing ever shorter.

Christopher Ryan Davis, sexual battery by an authority figure, Tennessee
Katherine Tew, sex offense with a student and indecent liberties with a student, North Carolina
Pamela Rogers Turner, sexual battery by an authority figure and statutory rape, Tennessee
Wayne E. Christopherson, first degree child molestation, Washington
Peter Ziskin, molestation, California
Joseph Conte, lewd conduct involving children under 16, Florida
Daniel Wayman, exposing himself and soliciting sex, Florida
Karri Suzanne Olmstead, drug charges, Indiana
Todd Christensen, endangering welfare of child and drug possession, New York
Chad Denis Maughan, third-degree child rape and second-degree sexual misconduct with a minor, Washington
Rebecca Boicelli, lewd acts with a minor and unlawful intercourse, California
Robert Gang, unspecified (used computer to correspond with minor, invited her to his home), New York
Dale Monnin, public indecency, Ohio
Jeffrey Brent Baber, child molestation, Indiana

I get queasy just thinking about this. Gotta go take some Tums.

UPDATE: Reader Scooter makes the case that any one of these individuals could be someone you know, or a family member. They may attend your church, or could be a co-worker. They may be completely innocent - victims of a "witch hunt" mentality. I'm not trying to be judge and jury in this case. I merely call attention to the need for parental vigilance, no matter what age the child.

I have every confidence that justice will be served in each case. If not, there's still one tribunal where mortal mistakes can finally be sorted out.

#145 - Adaptable Christianity

Hugh Hewitt was singing the praises of what must be a progressive church at the bottom of this post (long post, and you'll have to scroll waaay down to find this passage). He makes the following interesting statement:

As with every other institution out there, Christian churches have to adapt quickly to a new culture or decline just as quickly as audience share has for old newspapers and the big networks.

That sounds great in a market-based economy, but in reality it describes the greatest weakness of modern religion.

For years now we have witnessed tremendous turmoil in churches that were previously regarded as stalwarts. Just last year we watched in fascination as the Episcopal church threatened to implode over the elevation of an openly gay bishop. Had the church paid attention to its own doctrines over the centuries, it never would have reached this point. The question of gays - or even women - in the priesthood should never even have been subject to debate.

Every so often the Pope issues statements on topics ranging from abortion to celibacy in the priesthood. Agree or disagree with him, he's been consistent on those topics from the first days of his administration. With approximately one billion members worldwide, he can ill afford to have basic tenets of the church become subjects of open debate. He lays down the law and expects Catholics everywhere to obey those laws.

Those churches who have allowed such debate have seen tremendous struggles as they have evolved through societal changes and pressures. This lack of consistency is mirrored in the struggles their members have in dealing with those same pressures. Abortion, for example, ought to be a "no brainer" for orthodox Christianity. The sanctity of human life, even developing human life, is basic to our beliefs. Abortion, therefore, becomes an option only in extreme cases. Same sex marriage would be unacceptable upon careful examination of scripture because of statements made regarding homosexuality.

One of my own earliest posts pointed out the problems with what I call "designer scriptures" that have appeared recently. Statements by the "translators" made it clear that if enough people asked for it, changes would be made to accomodate their "needs."

Call me old fashioned (or, better yet, right-wing zealot), but I suspect that if the Lord had wanted such changes made to the scriptures, He would have dictated them that way in the first place. Rather than seemingly make eternal rewards easier to obtain, we should be helped to understand that those rewards are based on a lifetime of adherence to principles that never change.

I veer sharply from Hugh's path here. Adaptability is not what we truly need in our churches today. Consistency and conformity with eternal law are what we need. A return to the teachings of the Savior in their purest form is what we need.

We need it now more than ever.

UPDATE: Cameron at Way Off Bass correctly points out that some change is desirable, even necessary. We both agree, however, that such changes can only be administrative, not doctrinal. That's why the LDS Church will never have drum kits in their services. That's also why I spend so many hours at the church building on any given Sunday, instead of spreading my time out through the entire week as in years past. Life evolves and how we use our time will certainly evolve. The central tenets of religion, on the other hand, simply cannot.

UPDATE II: Mark Hansen over at Mo' Boy Blog picks up the thread. Good reading. Does a good job of defining the different kinds of change one could (and should) expect in a religious setting.

#144 - "Toys" for Attendance

Attendance at Los Angeles Unified schools has apparently gotten so bad, they're resorting to bribery to get kids to show up.

Heard this morning on local CBS affilliate KNX newsradio, the Los Angeles Unified School District has decided to award a Toyota to a "deserving student," defined as one who either shows markedly improved or outstanding attendance this year. Toyota, smelling a public relations coup, I'm sure, donated the vehicle to this worthy cause.

Time will tell what, if any, effect this raffle will have on the kids.

There's a commercial I dearly love. This is saying something because I detest most of them, but this one never fails to get a chuckle out of me. A dad is seen trying various ways to wake up his sleepy son in an attempt to get him out there fighting for those big scholarships. You may have seen this one. Dad is shown vacuuming the kid's room at some unearthly hour of the morning, blasting an air horn, and letting a squirrel loose. He then sends the kid off to school with the squirrel clinging leech-like to the kid's back. I laugh because I can easily envision my own parents trying stunts like that when I was a kid.

It also points out - in a more or less extreme way - that motivation of kids properly begins at home. Educators can do their best to keep education exciting and fresh for their students, but it begins (and should be perpetuated) at home.

The Toyota is, of course, a very large carrot dangling off of a very short stick. Unless they've decided to take every school's valedictorians and honor students out of the running, it's very possible that the car will be awarded to someone who is already (and probably always has been) attending school at or very near 100%. What motivation would that be to someone who has an honest desire to go to school but just can't get excited about facing another dreary day in the classroom? Let's assume such a kid decides that he or she would really like a new set of wheels. They put all that effort into improving their attendance, only to have the car awarded to someone who represents the school on the academic decathlon team. Bang goes another balloon in that kid's life.

I suspect, Mr. Romer, that most of your truant students are far too jaded to let a little thing like a new Toyota put their butts in a classroom chair any time soon. In fact, those who have found imaginative outlets for their energies are probably already driving something far racier than a stock Toy off the lot.

Mr. Romer either doesn't get it or can't do anything about it. Education needs to be its own reward. If the kids aren't seeing it that way, you need to do something about the perception. Lotteries that carry with them crushing disappointment for a large number of students aren't the way to go. Find ways to help parents get their kids out of the gang mentality. Make education more interesting. Cash in that Toyota and pay for another teacher. Whatever it takes, make it a practical approach with an exciting end result. For all students, not just the one that won the door prize.

Romer's strengths need to be in quality education, not bad marketing.

UPDATE: Welcome to Joanne Jacobs readers. Joanne teases me about bullying the Woodyettes. Hopefully I set her straight. ;-)

#143 - Celebrities Can Be Very Trying

Michael King (Rambling's Journal) opines that Michael Jackson needs to be given a long-term vacation at the nearest pedophilia rest home. One with bars that prevents dangling small children out of windows.

Celebrity trials have always presented a problem for me. Once upon a time I confess to being fascinated by the spectacle. Any time a headliner ended up in court, especially for more heinous crimes, I was just as sucked in as the media wanted me to be.

Until OJ, that is.

Dave Barry once stated that he expected the OJ trial industry to keep him busy for at least a year following the trial. If you took OJ out of the formula and substituted the word "celebrity," you'd have a lifetime supply of article fodder.

On one level I can understand the hype. Public figures have celebrity because they've done something at some point in their lives to make them famous. Movies, sports, politics. All have their iconic figures, and the public (assisted ably by the MSM) are constantly aware of their activities.

The OJ trial was the first one I paid much attention to, if only because it pointed out a few glaring inconsistencies in our woeful need for "hero" worship. Understand: I'm not saying hero worship is bad, so long as you're picking true heros to emulate. Unfortunately, most of the people branded as heros by their adoring fans are not so much worthy of worship as they are needful of serious counselling or intervention. Most of them are downright weird.

In OJ's case it was the idea that a man (a black man, to be honest) who had been a tremendous athlete, and had subsequently made a successful media life for himself could be somehow capable of such a heinous crime. We began to see how a life of celebrity began to unravel by stages. A man who had begun to buy into his own legend, a trophy wife, petty jealousies that escalated into violence. It was, and remains, a sad statement. Today the man lives in a fishbowl, hounded by a scandal-hungry public (assisted, again quite ably, by the MSM).

Michael Jackson is even more fascinating. Here was a man who, as a kid, had tremendous talent. There was no doubt the kid could sing. Then, mysteriously, he somehow missed that part of puberty where the voice changes. For years after most of us suffered through come-and-go Exorcist/PeeWee Herman voices, MJ still sounded like a twelve year old. As his music and celebrity continued to evolve, we watched him literally become a caricature of himself. His nose became pointy. His skin took on a bleached hue. His public antics and eccentricities were well documented. Then there was Neverland.

Rumors of sexual ambiguity and tales of children having "sleep overs." Young boys. Questions.

I had long since tuned it out.

The media-choreographed circus that was the OJ trial had finally cured me of my obsession with celebrity of any kind. As I watched his multi-million dollar legal defense team spin and conjure for the world to see, I became disgusted with the whole thing. With OJ. With his "dream team." With the drooling, fawning public who spurred the whole thing on.

Want to know the truth? I could care less whether Jackson is guilty of this crime. Let the justice system work its process quietly and efficiently. Close those doors and let the witnesses testify. Let the jury make their decision without becoming fodder for every media legal "expert" who doesn't have a real job in this country. Then let Jackson take the consequences of his actions. Let his empire crumble around him. He's had the spotlight long enough... probably far longer than he ever really deserved.

At the end of the day it will boil down to the same arguments. If he's convicted, it will be decried as character assassination. Jackson Senior is already playing the racism card. If he's acquitted, it will be seen as another celebrity "buying" his freedom.

Either way, it will make little difference in my own life. Except for not having to see his mutated image splashed in front of me every day. That, I can live with.

#142 - Blogger Returns from Bermuda Triangle

Wonders why there's been no progress on this planet

Cameron free-associates his work day (night? shift? I hate retail). Hilarious stuff, but you'll want to skip quickly past that cover of Li'l Kim. Or maybe you won't. Ya reads Cam, ya takes yer chances.

I've returned to the blogging yoke, with a piece of family history. Lighter fare if you need a break. Me? More CSI tonight and the new show "NUMB3RS." I like it. Appeals to my inner Geek.

#141 - Meme? What Meme?

Just a quick scan of Drudge tonight to see if there's anything fisk-worthy out there. Lessee now... hmm... D.C. is in "lockdown" mode for the inauguration tomorrow... wow, they've even got missile launchers deployed. Must be serious about this... Ok, Boxer insults Rice. Big Whoopin' Surprise there... Singer curses at youth inaugural concert. Look for an "I toldja so" from Malkin... Brits have their own hands full with Abu Ghraib abuses. Heh, join the club, fellas... Another UN alarmist predicts death and destruction for major cities. Big deal. Bible's been doing that for centuries, but will we listen? Noooo... Another Big Chill in Woebegon Land. More fodder for Moonbat Keillor, I suppo... Wait! What's this??

NOOOOOOooooooooo!!!

Not a scandal at KRISPY KREME!!??

It can't be, it just can't! Better check the link. Maybe Drudge is jumping the gun on this one... he's done that before...

Federal investigation... CEO with the intelligence of cottage cheese... accounting irregularities... stock plunges...

Oh, great. Now what'll I do on Breakfast Club days? Krispy Kremes are the only things I actually look forward to on Wednesdays! Danged low-carb diets, anyway.

Oh, wait. That makes it at least partly my fault. I'm guilty by association. Great.

*sigh*

Better hang up my bloggin' spurs. There ain't no joy no more.

#140 - Condi v. Senate

The hearings continue. I have little doubt that very little substantive debate regarding U. S. foreign policy will actually take place. It's always more of an opportunity for politicians who oppose the sitting president's policies to make their political hash in a forum where potential voters may actually be listening.

My only question is:

How difficult is it for multi-millionaire white males to have to question a woman who happens to be waaaaaay smarter than they are?

Just askin'.

#139 - Remind Me Why We Need Public Schools

Every time I find myself vacillating even a little about our decision to homeschool, something like this comes along. Joanne Jacobs points us to an article in the Mercury News about a middle school in Palo Alto, California who invited a rather, er, colorful speaker to their Career Day.

Assuming the salient talking points of the article to be true, I'm not sure which distresses me more: the idea that this fool was invited in the first place, or the fact that the kids thought he was the best speaker of the day.

Understanding that I'm putting myself squarely in opposition to all the ACLU bulemics who may wish to wave First Amendment arguments in my face, let me point out that anyone's right to freely express his or herself only serves to strengthen the argument that I should be allowed to control anything and everything to which my children are exposed. This becomes the essence of why Mrs. Woody and I choose to homeschool. There is no possible way that I or any relatively small group of like-minded people can significantly influence the academic agendas of any given school district to ensure that my children will be taught only those things of which I approve. This assumes, of course, that I tacitly approve of such things as math, history, English, science, and so forth. I draw the line, however, at moral issues.

So far as I can tell, modern schools, in concert with today's popular culture, have a lousy track record where teaching (or even encouraging) morality, integrity, or character are concerned. I see it as the height of irresponsibility to even suggest to any young person that by artificially increasing your natural anatomy you could make a fortune by exposing yourself to an addictive, destructive industry, no matter how legal it may be.

In fact, reading between the lines, the message shifts subtly: You don't necessarily have to work hard to make your way in this world. No one will think less of you for becoming a professional hedonist. Shucks, what do your parents know, anyway? If they nag, just leave. Go find someone who will become your enabler in life, so you can rationalize every dumb decision you seem determined to make.

The Principal, Joe DiSalvo, seems to have wonderful hindsight regarding the decision to hire this "management consultant" (now, there's a frightening thought!) as a Career Day speaker. Such a man would be allowed back if he were paired with a "strong teacher" and his materials were edited in advance. I guess that's why he's the principal, hm? To make those tough decisions and protect the kids, right?

If I were a Palo Alto parent and one of my children were in attendance at that event, Mr. DiSalvo wouldn't be taking quite so cavalier an attitude about it. He would find himself facing one hellatious fight at the District level with repeated demands that he step aside and let someone run that school who actually cares about the futures of the kids. There would be demands for a complete disclosure of every single event taking place at that school, and alternatives provided for activities where parents felt it inappropriate to have their kids attend.

Unfortunately, I'm sure Mr. DiSalvo's job is safe. Parents may be angry over the incident, but few, if any, will demand that level of accountability from their local educators. This has been the trend through most of the last century. Parents continue to abdicate their responsibilities to the schools. We've been conditioned to believe somehow that we are incapable of understanding what's best for our kids' educations. The unions can't see beyond the money they claim to need, administrators feel that only they have enough education themselves to be able to teach our youngsters, and the politicians can't stand the thought of anyone but themselves having control over the entire affair.

To those who do avail themselves of the public education system I say: Stay involved. Don't ever assume that your school is a "safe" haven for your kids. Question everything. Accept only the best. As for me...

Public schools long ago ran out of compelling arguments for why, exactly, I should submit my children to their tender mercies.

UPDATE: It's late Sunday evening, and this post has generated - by far - the most comment traffic I've ever seen on this blog. Between comments posted below, and those on my brother's site, I've been encouraged by the breadth of the discussion. Perhaps I can make more than an occasional ripple in the blogpond. Thanks to all who have commented. Even where we disagree, I have found the discussion to be both enlightening and stimulating.

#138 - Of Storms and Men

The recent winter storms that have pounded California have left me looking somewhat like a prune lately. While my eyes readjust to sunlight, I can take time now to ponder the fate of those who, like the recent tsunami victims, have been called upon to sacrifice seemingly without cause.

Most heart-wrenching (for me, anyway) are two stories. Obviously, the landslide at La Conchita is an extreme tragedy. We Woodys pass by this little community every time we drive up to Santa Barbara to visit family. It always amazed me that people would be plucky enough to build homes in a spot where that cliff had given way at least once before. It amazes me still that people there are already talking about rebuilding.

Another story that made the local news was of a mother in the Antelope Valley, north of Los Angeles, who had driven around a flood barricade and gotten stuck. She managed to get herself and three children out of the vehicle and onto the roof to await rescue workers. A helicopter got her two older children, then began to lift her while she held onto her two old. Part way up, the woman's grip slipped and the child plummeted back into the raging water below. They found the child's body downstream a few hours later.

These are incidents that I cannot possibly imagine having to live through.

There are lessons here to be learned, of course. Now, however, is not the time to expound them. Now is the time for compassion and action on behalf of the victims. We can save the debate for why these things happened for a later day.

So, what to do? Many, many people have already banded together to give assistance, whether physical or financial, to victims of storm damage. Some of us, unfortunately, are not in a position to offer that kind of assistance. But there are still ways we can contribute.

If your physical faculties are limited and money is tight, you can always give blood. Back in October, I posted about having visited the "friendly vampires" of the American Red Cross. I'd do so now, but have to wait for this dratted flu bug to pass. In the meantime, let me recap what I'd written in that post:

Being close to Halloween, I visited the vampires the other day. It's been awhile and I had some extra blood that was just laying around looking bored, so I gave it something to do. Years ago, this would never have happened without heavy sedation.

<Ensuing long-winded story about my unreasonable childhood fear of needles and how I overcame it.>

The "vampires" are, of course, the friendly American Red Cross volunteers who work blood drives throughout the world. I've been on the receiving end of their services, and I'm grateful they were there. I've not been a consistent donor over the years, but I always feel good when I do. I always feel like I'm making a real contribution to society, as opposed to this incredibly self-serving blog stuff I write.

The Red Cross gave me a donor's card last year, and it says "Type O Hero" right on it. Given my history with needles, I feel a little like a hero.

Please donate. Call 1-800-GIVELIFE to find out where and how.

Please donate. I will, once I'm safe again.

#137 - Is CBS Worth Redeeming?

I simply do not have time to get into a deeper analysis of the CBS investigation, and I'm perfectly content to trust those who have torn the report limb from limb elsewhere. Cases can be made for all opinions I've read so far. CBS did take some serious collateral damage from Thornburgh's team, but still managed to neatly side-step the more basic issue of whether they displayed "political bias" in their Bush/TANG smear campaign. (Oopsie... did I just let my own bias show? Silly me!)

For my part, I really don't care about the report. Unlike many bloggers, I simply have not been holding my breath waiting to hear from some respected yahoo as to whether CBS poked itself in it's own Black Eye. The real question for me is whether CBS (or any of the "legacy" media) is worth the effort it would take to rebuild.

CBS (as well as every other long-established news organization) touts itself as a reliable, respected source for news and information deemed important to our lives. Never mind that we seem to spend copious amounts of time listening to "important" reports of celebrity trials, athlete arrests of the day, and "in depth" reports consisting of 5 minutes' worth of heavily filtered material. The fact that this pablum comes from organizations like CBS somehow makes it "respectable."

Once upon a time the news orgs held sway over the world of information. They were able to keep us well informed because we lacked the abilities, energies, or resources to learn otherwise. Dissenting voices were drowned out as they lacked the infrastructure to make themselves heard over the din of nightly newscasts.

Enter the Internet, and the instantaneous exchange of information from around the world. Not by "seasoned" professional reporters, but by human observers of all kinds in every nation. People not only "on the ground," but intimately involved with the events that shape our perceptions. We were given streaming video of images from the tsunami within hours of that event, making those images superfluous when shown later in the day on any given network. Before I ever heard a news anchor talk about relief efforts, the 'Net was abuzz with multiple ways to donate and contribute to those efforts. I didn't need another talking head in an empty suit bravely standing under a 30 foot wall of water to tell me how bad it was.

I already knew. (Do I even need to mention how quickly the blogosphere reacted to the tragedy?)

For my money (or lack thereof), CBS can go the way of the dodo. Their brains have already been sucked out through their noses. Let's just finish the embalming job and bury them in the nearest pyramid.

Who knows? In another 1,000 years or so, even CBS may be worth something.

#136 - The Woundup Evolves... Again

You may notice that I have new addition to my blogroll. In view of previous posts defining the direction I wanted to take, I decided that rather than give the Woundup a face lift, I needed to start a new blog. I call it "The Inner Dad," and it will be my forum for describing my journey through Dadhood.

I may have mentioned before (or possibly not... hard to remember what I've told to whom!) that I wrote a book a couple of years ago. Oh, it's never been published. I'm too chicken to go through the traumatic experience of finding an agent and publisher that might be interested in the topic. Some day, perhaps. But it has given me that sense of accomplishment for having written an actual book all the same.

The original title of the book was "The Dad Within," but I have since decided to call it "The Inner Dad." I have always felt that there was a community out there of men like myself, trying to get through life with a decent career, a family, and kids that weren't trying to out-attitude each other. The book actually addresses those who are contemplating becoming a dad at some point in their lives.

The new blog is my mirror to that book, and will host my various essays on Dadhood, its challenges, its rewards, and the general hilarity that typically ensues.

So, what about the Woundup? Well, in shifting paradigms I felt like there were folks who had added me to their rolls who expected me to continue with my rants about socio-political hotspots of the day. The Woundup will continue, then, to live up to its original charter, while The Inner Dad will be my kinder, gentler offering.

I think of it not so much as schizophrenia as multi-tasking. Any mom will snort and say it ain't possible.

I'd like to think it is.

#135 - Help! I'm Being Oppressed!

I am what might be considered a double minority.

That probably sounds pretty funny coming from a white middle-aged male. Even a republican white male. But it's true nonetheless.

Among conservatives, I am considered "right wing" because of my religious beliefs and the fact that those beliefs drive my political thinking (and, by extension, my votes). I have no problem with the "right wing" moniker, and it is certainly less offensive than what many liberals tend to call us under certain uncontrolled circumstances.

Christians still claim to hold a majority in this country. Our detractors may be noisier, but we still seem to have the edge in numbers. Among Christians, however, Latter-day Saints are a definite minority. No problem. I've dealt with this perception all my life.

I also am a dedicated homeschooler. Minority number two.

Based on the mounds of scurilous reports from various sources over the past few years, one might get the idea that I am a persecuted minority. Probably true, but it hasn't affected me directly just yet.

In fact, being a homeschooler today just puts me on par with being an incumbent republican president up for re-election. Liberals and media will pull out all the stops to manufacture the idea that I am somehow untrustworthy and must be destroyed. In the face of an overwhelming lack of evidence, media has joined itself to one of the largest and most powerful unions in this country - the NEA - for the purpose of discrediting the homeschooling movement in the United States.

Now, I'll grant you, the idea that the NEA is behind all of the negative reports is terribly circumstantial. It's really just my mathematics: I've put two and two together and come up with a not unreasonable supposition. Having said that, let me explain a few things to those who read (and, worse, believe) reports like the one currently being fisked by JunkYardBlog:

1. Child abusers and killers use a variety of disguises including, but not limited to, homeschooler, banker, public school teacher, NASA engineer, actor/actress, United Nations delegate, elected public official, and (not to leave anyone out) minister. Pick your flavor.

2. Granted, an alarming number of children who have been abused or killed come from alleged homeschooling families. Please understand that I consider "one or more" to be an alarming number. Please also understand that whatever the real number may be, it still represents a very small percentage of homeschooling families.

3. Liberal (and some misguided moderate) politicians, public education officials, and any member of the unions supporting education in this country cannot abide homeschoolers. It's pathological. The idea that someone, somewhere, may be providing a child a substantial education without their express consent or control just galls them.

4. These same politicians and educators seem not to understand that I am just as interested as they are in preparing my child for success in their future world. In fact, I am fully prepared to do whatever it takes to prepare my children for success in college and beyond, and I will do so without the support of these people if need be.

5. I have also mentioned before that I not only believe that homeschooling is not for everyone, but I further do not support voucher initiatives, or any other initiative that would divert taxes that I pay toward public education for any other purpose. I firmly believe it is my civic duty to support a public education that is freely available to those who need it. I also believe that my children do not need it. If you can't figure out a better way to allocate my tax money to the children that are in school, that's not my problem. Hire better administrators and politicians. Be prepared to pay for them.

I think you get the idea. I do worry that politicians, driven by the unions and supported by the media, will begin another jihad against homeschoolers. But they will fail. We are better organized than we've been in years past, and our grassroots support is growing. Also, the best thing educators can do for the homeschool movement is to continue to fail to educate and protect our children.

That sounds cynical, but you should hear them talk about us.

UPDATE: Oh, yeah. I really want my kids exposed to this environment. (HT: Drudge)