I love my parents, and I miss them very much. They were the greatest influences in my life growing up and they taught not just by words but also by deeds. They believed the best about others and expected the best. They taught me to be curious as well as courteous. They taught me a love of knowledge and a love for people, no matter their background or station in life. I am who I am because of them and I thank God fro them, especially when I observe other less stellar parental models.

But when I was in high school and early college they drove me nuts!  It was not an accident that I went out of state to college (4 out of 6 years) i could have saved money staying in-state, but that was not going to happen. I guess it's kind of a teen thing...needing independence. My dad and I got along better years later, but teen time was tough. my mom was a sweetie and gentle soul, but I was the baby of the family and I guess it was hard for her to see me grow up and want to fly away.

My parents weren't perfect, though they tried to do their best. My country is just the same. I love it because it's my home. I am proud to be an American, not because we are perfect, but because we have tried over the years to improve and stand for the right things. We shouldn't whitewash our history, but rather acknowledge the blemishes and learn from them. I say this as one who was not only born and raised here, but whose ancestry goes back to the founding of our nation and long before.

Some people don't want to hear criticism of our country. They chant "USA,USA!" to shout down critics and complain that anyone who calls out national faults is somehow un-American or is part of a "blame America first" crowd. That's nonsense. That's like saying you never should question your parents.

As we grow we go from thinking our parents know everything, to thinking they don't know anything, to finally realizing that the truth is somewhere in-between. As we grow as citizens we also go from accepting everything in textbooks at face value , to questioning/disputing everything, to seeing things in context and acknowledging the growth patterns.

amnesty ? yes

In the whole immigration debate there is one word that seems to be taboo.  Amnesty.  Some people use it as a weapon to demean policy opponents and stifle debate. While others tie themselves into linguistic and logical knots in order to explain why their reform proposals don't favor it. But I advocate embracing it. It's easier that way and I believe it is totally consistent with the Christian teaching, something that  amnesty opponents supposedly believe in.

What is amnesty but forgiveness and isn't that the message of the cross? At Easter we remember that we have all broken the moral laws of God. We recognize that we are all in need of his help and that he gave it freely with no preconditions. Why then do we act like we are somehow superior to others who may not speak or look like us, or who simply had the misfortune to be born on the "wrong" side of a border?

Often the refrain comes "but they broke the law". Have you ever driven over the speed limit, gone through a red light, or done something dumb on the road and then were secretly glad a cop wasn't around? All those times you broke the law, but you got away with it. Or how about times (like I have had) when you got pulled over and managed to talk your way out of a ticket? We have all done these or similar things, but in our minds that "breaking of the law" is somehow okay.

There are legitimate issues with border security and reform of our immigration system is needed, but demonizing people is not helpful or kind. To label as "enemies" or "invaders" those born in extreme poverty who come here to make a better life for themselves and their families is just cruel. Some even callously complain that they are overtaxing our emergency rooms (treating their lives as less valuable than ours). It doesn't matter how they came, we should be kind and helpful anyway.

What did you do to earn citizenship and all its privileges? Unless you were an immigrant yourself, and most of us are not, you did nothing. I know I didn't, nor did my siblings, nor my parents, nor any in my family tree, back to before there was a US...because we were born here. We didn't have to take any tests, pass any background checks, learn a foreign language...we all learned English the easy way, we grew into it.

There are many issues in immigration and perhaps I can get to those in other posts. Like the Dream Act - helping kids, who had no part in their parents bringing them here, go to college. Or kids born here to illegal immigrants and their citizenship status (and why it's a no-brainer). Or reform of the system and how some want to devise a "second-tier" residency.

But on this Easter Sunday I want to emphasize one thing. I am totally and unashamedly in favor of amnesty. There are millions in our country who have admittedly come here crossing the border without following all the legal rules. I do not excuse that, but I have seen the conditions in Mexico outside of the touristy border towns and resort cities and I can understand their motivation to come here to better their families' lives. And rounding them all up for massive deportation is just unrealistic.

It is time to bring them out into the light. It is time to stop treating them like criminals or treating ourselves as "perfect'. Recognize their efforts and help them integrate into our society as full partners in this land of opportunity. Give them a chance to unionize so companies cannot take advantage of their silence to cheat them on wages or working conditions. Provide them with classes so that they can become fluent in English and contribute more through expansion of skills.  And, yes, provide them a "path to citizenship"

Some may say that I am just a "bleeding heart", and an idealist. I accept that and wear it as a badge of honor, especially today. I am forgiven and free because of the ultimate "bleeding heart" and I think if people think that that term is a slur then they really need to re-examine their professed faith and what the meaning of Easter is.   Just my two cents worth today.:)

He is risen indeed if he is reflected in our actions today:)

spring is here

The sun is out, the flowers are blooming, and I am reminded that it is important in our hectic, often troublesome world to "stop and smell the roses"...literally. Life has a way of getting us down, sapping our strength, tying us up in knots worrying about a lot of things we really have no control over, or painting life as only bleak existence. We need to use our five senses to relieve stress and help balance our lives.

So stop and smell those roses, or whatever is blooming right now. As a gardener I love my roses, lilac, honeysuckle, and butterfly bush. The smell on the breeze is sweet and relaxing. The scents of lavender. rosemary, and fennel when rubbed between my fingers is invigorating. And even freshly-mowed grass brings a smile to my face (specially since I now have an electric mower:))

The sight of purple and white crocuses, yellow daffodils, and green sprigs of fennel starts break up the gray of winter and signal that spring is here (or nearly so). The leaves of tulip and grape hyacinth leaves are teases to upcoming color bursts. And the purple winter heather blooms and red dogwood stems linger in transition. I love watching the seasons change in my garden.

The sounds of jaybird, robin, and several small birds as they visit my bird-feeding sites is audible sunshine. The woodpecker banging its beak on some neighborhood downspout or signpost is a creature wake-up call. And the unseen, but clearly heard beaver splashes and frog croaks are music to my ears.

The wind and the rain as I walk invigorate me. The sunshine breaks warm me. Sometimes, when it is warmer and drier, I like to just sit out on the front lawn and gaze around, silently taking in the experience of the plants nearby and letting the wider world just fade into the background for a while.

Later, when the strawberries, raspberries, and herbs, bloom, I will savor the taste of freshly picked produce. Maybe this year I will again try my hand at growing vegetables -nothing is as sweet as a freshly picked cherry tomato from a back yard planter). But for now I resolve to slow down and savor my food, try new tastes, and not just eat mindlessly.

I see people out walking who are oblivious to the world around them. They walk with radios/music players plugged into their ears. I am not judging, it may be that they need the music/talking to get them motivated to walk/run, and I am glad to see them exercising. But I just think of what they are missing. I want to hear the birds, feel the breeze, and ponder thoughts with only the company of my footsteps. I want to experience nature, not just travel through it.

My suggestion: take some time to experience beauty. Life is too short to major on what is wrong with the world. There is plenty of time to ponder that. I know, I rant on things, just like I plug into the radio (music mainly) when I start work for the day. But I also like to step away from the madness to experience beauty.

And you now have another avenue to experience beauty. My wife, has started a blog called Adorned in Beauty. I highly recommend it. She has been my "fashion consultant" since before we were married, and she has an impeccable sense of taste. She beautifies my life and I think you'll like the beautiful things she has found. She also created the banner for my blog, as well as doing a recent redesign of the layout. She is my sweetie, the top beauty in my world :)

personal responsiblity on the air..my take

For about 10 years I was a part-time staff announcer on a small Christian radio station in Phoenix. I started as a volunteer, answering phones and pulling records for a Saturday morning music request program. After a while there I decided I would like to try my hand being on air so I contacted the general manager and started training with him and the station engineer. I worked mainly weekends and overnight and some evenings occasionally. I would run programs, do weather and news breaks, and even had some shifts when I could choose my own music and create commentary to tie it all together.

Since ours was a small listener-supported station we had no commercials, but did have a loyal following, many of whom would call, any time of day. Some would like to chat, or had a record request, or sometimes need advice for a personal crisis(especially on the overnight shifts). When the phone rang, it was my responsibility to answer it, be polite and helpful, being aware that I was representing the station (and God, since we were a Christian station). I took that very seriously, even when I was trying to do several things at once - run programs, pick music, record stuff for later broadcast -and check the news wire.

I was often the only person at the station during my shifts, so I operated the control board, took transmitter readings (making sure we were FCC-compliant), and kept records of what we played, all the while making the necessary on air announcements. One time we even had the power go out while I was doing a station ID break. The engineer happened to be there at the time, so I wasn't alone, but we still had to coordinate calling the airport to alert them our tower lights were out, get the backup generator running, and still answer the phones - people wanted to know why we weren't on the air.

All this came back to mind in the wake of Rush Limbaugh's vulgar and outrageous verbal attack on Sandra Fluke -a woman smeared with sexist slurs, whose only "crime" was a desire to testify before Congress about a matter important to her. It wasn't just the words he used, nor that he has a history of such remarks. The worst thing is that he apparently doesn't care what comes out of his mouth when he opens the mike, takes no responsibility for it, and obviously has no one that he feels he must answer to.

In my radio work I was very careful what I said on the air. Not only were our supporters listening, but our general manager was as well. If any one of us had uttered anything close to what Rush said (not that we ever would) we would have been promptly fired, no questions asked. Apparently Rush has no one in that position. Plus we were focused on giving encouragement to our listeners, not rile them up to "go on the attack"

The only thing worse than Rush's comments is the silence that followed them, from those who share his conservative beliefs. It really shouldn't matter what your politics is, common decency demands that you treat others as you would want to be treated, and speak up in protest when others cross the line. There are those on the left that I avoid or sample lightly because of their tendency to be vulgar or derogatory. And "false equivalency" comments are just a way to dodge speaking up.

I have never cared for Bill Maher for instance. "Politically incorrect" is a term I loath, because in my mind it is just a rationale to be rude. If we want to be taken seriously when we criticize bad behavior, we must criticize without taking political views into mind. When we were kids and got into trouble it was no use bringing up others bad deeds. All our parents were focused was correcting us, because we were under their roof.

Words matter and we should care about what we say, how we say it, and to whom (and about whom) we say them. Not just for legal reasons or FCC rules,etc, but just because cultivating civility is the right thing to do and helps build better communities, locally, nationally, and globally.

not my enemy

The presidential campaign and the sideshow that accompanies it has taken a turn towards the absurd. Some commentators have shown beyond a doubt that they have tin ears and blind eyes. It is one thing to be cynical but quite another to be inflexible. I don't think I have to name names, 'cause I think you know who I mean.

It is bad enough to view efforts to provide healthcare for all as dangerous or to portray seeking to have peacemaking a key component of our foreign policy as weakness. It is harmful to characterize calls for civility in our political discussions as censorship. But when an appeal from the president for teamwork and basic fairness is denounced as an appeal for class warfare we have reached the stone ear stage indeed.

We are all Americans, we are all in this together. I think we need to pause and remember that, no matter what our political, religious, or social views. We share this country, and we must remember to share. No one gets to hog it all and whoever is elected in November will be President of all and deserves our respect. That is the American way.

I am a Democrat. I believe in an active government, acting as "we the People" in carrying out the desires of the nation for a "more perfect Union", providing for the "common defense", and promoting the "general welfare" espoused in the Preamble to the Constitution. I believe we have a moral obligation to provide for those less fortunate and not hold ourselves aloof and simply blame them for "not trying hard enough". And I believe that government is "us",not some distant "other" to be feared, opposed, or "limited".

As such I obviously have serious differences with all of the GOP presidential candidates and their supporters in media and in elected office. I will work to oppose their efforts and argue against their positions. But, and this is a very big "but', they are not my enemy. We are not in a war, not for the "soul of America" nor for"civilization", and I refuse to portray our political disagreements in such militaristic terms.

Even when others may slip into that mode, I refuse. If the (to my mind) unthinkable happens and a Republican wins the White House I will respect them as President , just as I have any other President. I will have discussions with those with whom I disagree in a spirit of mutual respect. I will walk away from, but not demean, those who seek fights and refuse to even listen to opposing views. I may brand opposing views as absurd when warranted, but will work to refrain from making personal attacks. As I have said before, we are all Americans and we must all work together for what is best for everyone.

This holds true for our actions in the world. Make no mistake, we have real enemies out there, folks who have taken up arms against us and would seek to do us harm. We must actively oppose that. But we must not go around looking for trouble, nor brand those nations who may differ with us on policies as "not our friends" (like the attitudes of many in the US toward France and Germany over the Iraq war). For those of us who hold to faith in God we have a divine mandate to "seek peace and pursue it" and "as much as it depends on you, live at peace with all men". Blessings are called out for peacemakers, not warmongers, and we should not take that lightly. We all must "share" this world.

Set your "weapons" down and let's all work together to make this nation, and our world, be the best it can be, where nobody goes hungry, or sick,or homeless, or friendless. We all can make a difference...if only we try.

go to the source

We live in a technologically advanced, but informationally stunted world. We seemingly have all the information we need at our fingertips, but often lack the will, or curiosity, to use it to our advantage. We all too frequently fall back on letting someone else tell us what to do and what is true when we should be investigating for ourselves and making better decisions.

Politics is just one of those areas, but it gets a great amount of attention every four years at least, as is the case now. We are blessed in this country to be free to elect our leaders. In much of the world this is not the case and we should not take lightly the responsibility to make wise decisions as to who to support. The GOP debates may seem tedious and simply forums for talking point reiteration, but they can serve to help us identify what is really important to us, even for those who aren't planning to vote GOP.

It is more than just "fact-checking" that we need to do. We also need to check quotes and context. People tend to view speakers as "scholarly" or "expert" when they cite history and quote historical documents. But how often do these same people check the sources of the citations and quotes to see if they are accurate? Not very often in my opinion. And that can lead people to make very unsound decisions.

Case in point: during the latest debate Newt Gingrich was ranting about the judiciary and how it was damaging America with bad rulings...that it was out of control and needed to be reined in. He made a couple of really outlandish suggestions - getting rid of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (conservatives "favorite" court) and summoning justices before Congress to "explain" their "controversial" rulings. That was bad enough, but his rational was worse...and that (again) got overlooked in the analysis.

Gingrich is certainly no friend of the courts, but he covers his blatant animosity with a 'scholarly" sheen, by using quotes and making historical references to his advantage. Unfortunately, he often misquotes and takes things out of context. As a preacher I once heard said " a text out of context becomes a pretext". This describes Newt very well. I won't belabor the point or overwhelm you with examples, but let me just cite a couple examples.

He stated that the founders intended for the judiciary to be the weakest branch of government. He was referencing the discussion of the judiciary in the Federalist Papers, the collection of letters written by Hamilton, Madison, and John Jay, to persuade New York state to ratify the Constitution. They talked about the relative weakness of the judicial branch, but in a matter advocating protecting it's independence from the other two branches (executive and legislative), not subordinating it to them.

To quote Federalist #78 : the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power ...it can never attack with success either of the other two..all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks". They were not saying that the judiciary should be the weakest. They were saying that it was in the most vulnerable position and needed protection (like with lifetime appointments and a prohibition on cutting a justice's salary during their time of service).

Newt also said that the courts were not the final arbiter of the law. But, to quote the same Federalist paper "The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts" and "the courts of justice..whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the constitution void. Without this, the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing".

For a supposed "scholar" of the Constitution to be this wrong is not accidental, it is purposeful. It is an attack upon the part of government designed to be the protector of our rights and should not be viewed as merely "crackpot". As a former history/poli sci major myself this makes my blood boil!

I would urge anyone to avail themselves of three resources which can be invaluable in combating, personally and collectively, the misinformation that is spewed out regularly by those who seek to influence our political decisions. Three links:

1. The Federalist Papers, if you don't have a hard copy (as I do)

2. The Constitution (you really should have a hard copy...and read it often)

3. Thomas.gov...where you can look up the history, sponsors, and full text of any congressional legislation...to find out what it "really" says.


With these three you can combat much of the disinformation being thrown out there during this political season. Don't let anyone (not even me) make your decisions for you. As the saying goes "God gave you a brain, now use it"

ask the right questions

Once again we have a bit of humor in the presidential race , thanks to Rick Perry. At a meeting with an Iowa newspaper's editorial board he was criticizing President Obama's Supreme Court appointees, yet couldn't remember correctly the name of one (Sotomayor) and misstated the number of Justices on the Court. Surely a candidate for president should know these things. The filling of a Supreme Court vacancy is a vital presidential task and one that may arise during this next presidential term, considering Justice Ginzberg's health. While it is important that a candidate be accurate in these details , however, this is not what got my attention in his comments.

As we laugh at these gaffs we often miss the bigger issue. It is the wrongful thinking that is behind the statements these candidates make. Because Rick Perry is not alone in his sentiments, just the most visible at times. He used two adjectives to describe the Justices, used both negatively, when only one is true and that one should be viewed as a positive not negative.

He said that the Justices were "unelected" and "unaccountable". The first is true but for reasons I will explain shortly, this I believe is a positive, not negative characteristic of both the Supreme Court and the rest of the federal court system. The second assertion is definitely false, but you have to think harder than a "fifth grader" to understand the reasons why.

First there is the appointment and confirmation process, where the President and the Senate, representing the other two branches of our government (both elected by the people) , choose the members of the Court. Then there is the ability of a latter Court to overturn earlier decisions after review (see Plessy v Ferguson (1896) overturned by the Brown decision (1954) as the most notable example).

There is also the ability for Congress to pass Constitutional amendments to correct deficiencies in the law and render moot a Court's decision. Prime example of this was the 13th Amendment (1865) , outlawing slavery , in response to the Dred Scott decision . There was also the 16th Amendment (1913) ,passed to overcome Court objections to a federal income tax.

And there is the matter of impeachment. Just as for the President, any member of the federal judiciary can be impeached by the House of Representatives and face trial in the Senate, with conviction resulting in removal from office. Throughout our history 19 federal court justices have been impeached (including one Supreme Court justice) and several have been removed from office after trial in the Senate. So you see, the justices and their decisions are accountable.

The other contention, that they are unelected, is true. But I would contend that this is a positive characteristic, not negative. I have always felt that the election of judges, the common practice for state courts, was not good. Members of the legislative and executive branches should be responsive to the people. The members of the judicial branch, the judges, should be responsive to the law, protecting the people's rights. All rights, not just the majority.

When cases reach the federal courts the stakes are higher. The rulings will often affect many people from multiple states (the health care reform cases are one example) and the questions reach to the core of fundamental rights and freedoms. Also, the issues may invoke alleged overreach by the executive or legislative branches of the federal government. The courts must have the independence to rule against either branch if the case warrants. A lifetime appointment guarantees this.

Our rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution involve the right to be unpopular. To voice unpopular views, have unpopular beliefs, to gather with unpopular people to advocate unpopular causes. Popular opinions do not need protection. Majority views do not need special protection. They are protected by their own popularity. But minority opinions, like minority populations, are vulnerable to the "tyranny of the majority", and need safeguarding by a court system where judges are free to make the "unpopular" decision to defend them.

Our history as a country is one of evolving protection for minority populations and views, expanding our understanding of what it means to be free, and challenging ourselves to open our minds to the truth that if anyone's freedom is curtailed we all suffer. We cannot go backward. We must stay vigilant. Rick Perry is not alone in his skewed views on the Court…his fellow GOP candidates all share basically the same views. We must hold them "accountable" for these and render them all "unelected"