PURPLE PASSION

Some see red. Some see blue. Most of us see a blend of purple in there somewhere, but others are so narrowly focused that any tint of purple is offensive.

Several weeks ago I witnessed an adult man who was particularly blind. He was loud. Vocal. You know the kind. Very unattractive. He had a favorite candidate - his chosen one - and come hell or that rising water, he was going to offer whatever assistance he could to spur his choice on to victory. Many of us witnessed his erratic affection. Even those who also shared his passion and cheered on the blue - who actually agreed with his opinion - wrestled with distancing themselves from this man who found disrespectful articulation appropriate. When his favorite won, he celebrated loudly, regardless of any disappointed in his immediate audience. Also, even amidst victory, if a single word was uttered even constructively critically - a potential negative in regard to his primary candidate - the blinded man became predictably hostile.

It was ugly. I saw the blind man four inches from another’s face, fulfilling all aspects of Seinfeld’s “close talkers” rendition. The voice was raised and the finger fiercely wagging. He spewed at the teenager, who at a young age still logically opined that he felt the blind man’s candidate engaged in a stimulating action worthy of a foul. The blind man would have no part of it. The resulting confrontation led me to question who behaved more as the adolescent.

A week later the disrespectful spewing found itself solely directed at someone else, someone, too, who had concluded the blind man’s candidate was not quite as perfect as publicly acclaimed. This confrontation reached a new level, and our agitated blind man was actually asked to leave the public forum. In a moment that proved that age and maturity are not always coexistent, the blind man continued his jeers and jabbering jabs throughout his ejection.

Sometimes our passions get in the way of seeing rightly. Sometimes they get in the way of being respectful. Sometimes they tempt us to justify ugliness as a righteous behavior... just as it did for the aforementioned parent... at my 10 year old’s basketball game.

AR

OH, HOW WE LOVE EVERYONE

There rings a familiar refrain in our household. The first justification goes something like this: “Everyone’s doing it!” The less than enthusiastic response echos as follows: “Just because everyone’s doing it, doesn’t make it right.”

Just because “everyone” owns a Playstation 3, XBOX 360, and/or a Wii, does not mean our children will be deprived without the latest unveiled gaming system.

Just because “everyone” determined Heath Ledger deserved the Oscar for his supporting role in “The Dark Knight,” does not mean we need to ignore that the role generated the nightmares that potentially precipitated his death.

Just because “everyone” is either a Yankees or Red Sox fan, does not mean we must avoid cheering for the less heralded underdog.

Just because “everyone” has adopted an attitude of political correctness, does not mean tolerance of all things is appropriate.

Just because “everyone” likes mushrooms and pickles, does not mean I need to relish them on my hamburger.

Just because “everyone” is overjoyed that their state government is a bailout recipient, does not mean we should withhold questioning the appropriateness of an Arkansan donating his taxpayer money to an unemployed Californian.

Just because “everyone” thinks Ashley Judd and Sean Penn are “cool,” does not mean we should think their shaming of those who articulate an alternate opinion is evidence of using their celebrity status well.

Just because “everyone” thinks global warming is now fact, does not mean the many scientists who have come to a conflicting conclusion need to be silenced.

And just because “everyone” calls the Dallas Cowboys “America’s Team,” does not mean we have to concur with T.O., Romo, and Jessica Simpson in their Super Bowl pick.

My point is this: wisdom triumphs over opinion; that includes all polling data. “Just because” our main man, “everyone,” feels a specific way does not equate to “rightness.” There was a time when “everyone” thought the world was flat. There was a time when “everyone” thought Hitler was ok. And there was a time “everyone” thought slavery represented a respectable employment opportunity.

“Everyone” is not necessarily wise. To equalize “everyone” with wisdom is simply a popular exercise... in foolishness, that is.

AR

SHOW ME SOME MONEY

As we humanly attempt to wrap our minds around the billions of dollars bank bailout... the billions of dollars auto bailout... the somewhat lesser mortgage bailout... and the zillion dollar economic bailout... it seems only logical to ask what you hope has been included in the bailing... I mean, it is our money. (Part of me wonders how I became so instantly wealthy... oh, wait... I am not... I do not possess said zillions... uh, problem is the government does not either...)

And so (...according to a very UNscientific poll...), here is what some of you clamor for:

* A $4000 check.
* A $5000 check. (Personally, I like 5 better than 4.)
* ”I'd like some money towards my college education...if I had more help with that, then I'd stimulate the economy with other purchases rather then having all my money tied up in student loans & horrid interest rates.”
* ”My house paid for.”
* A live-in masseur.
* 40 BOGO (Buy-One-Get-One-Free) coupons to Applebees, Outback, Olive Garden, and Cracker Barrel... “We have to eat, but our freedom to choose how to spend our money should be limited.”
* Money for restaurants that don’t serve pork.
* Unlimited gift cards to Walmart.
* The Governorship of Illinois. (I heard it can be bought.)
* $100 Starbucks gift certificates... “How can we shop without caffeine?”
* Lattes for $13/week, “if you buy the small size.”
* More Starbucks. (Caffeine is stimulating.)
* Childcare for older, autistic kids.
* “Money for car washes. Then we would use less gas, because clean cars slide through the air better.”
* A check “in proportion to the amount of taxes I have paid in.”
* No pet projects.
* Money for the dairy farmers.
* Money for small market baseball teams.
* Accountability partners for all Senators and Congressmen!
* A proclamation encouraging the purchase of my book. (See ”Essential Survival Guide to Living on Your Own” by S.Siepel on www.amazon.com.)
* A house cleaning service “ so we can go out and shop, work, and stimulate the economy!”

And on the high end of creative thinking, listen to the following wise readers from Ohio and Texas respectively:

* ”All government workers should have 5 days of unpaid leave this year (this includes the President). We will then hold a national lottery (at $1 a ticket) to see who gets to run the country on the days Obama has off!” (Note: includes the potential to stimulate both the economy AND the ego.)

And...

* ”I would like federally funded pedicures for all. It is close to sandals season and well-groomed feet are something we should NOT have to live without. Plus, I don't want to look at anyone else's gnarly toes!”

Here’s to no gnarly toes... amen to that... they provide ZERO stimulation.

AR

UNCOMMON POLICY

Ok. Maybe it’s just me. Maybe you, too. But somewhere along the line, probably due to my Judeo-Christian heritage, I learned that lying was wrong. It was not exactly one of those gray areas in life that our parents disagreed on which path of wisdom to impart. I mean, none know with certainty if Washington’s proclamation was factual, but honesty is a virtue.

So if it’s a virtue, why do so many adults avoid its possession?

I have been figuratively racking my brain... attempting to discern the motivation for such deceit. We have each heard some seemingly noble explanations for dishonest intent; however, the idea that therein lies any nobility makes it appear the deceit only continues. My best stab at intent is this: people lie because they wish to control what we think of them.

I’ll say it again. People lie because they wish to control what we think of them.

One of my favorite authors is John Ortberg. I especially appreciate his book, “The Life You’ve Always Wanted,” subtitled “Spiritual Disciplines for Ordinary People.” (One note of disclosure: I’m pretty ordinary, and I need discipline!) But Ortberg introduces the concept of how we individually attempt to control what others think of us... attempting to “convince them that our motives are pure, that our accomplishments are impressive, or that our life is in better shape than it seems.” The technical term for this manipulative behavior is “impression management.”

Sometimes the attempts simply are the forewarners of our conversation... For example... “You know, I would never cheat on my taxes, BUT...” “Obviously, I am not a regular viewer of soap operas, HOWEVER...” Each initial phrase is articulated in order to control the conclusions of my audience. Unfortunately, however, sometimes impression management plays out on a grander scale.

Like some notable, national politicians.
Like multiple Illinois Governors.
And like those who discovered steroids help the ball go a little farther.

The New York Yankees’ Alex Rodriquez has at times been considered one of the best players on the planet. He was named the 2003 Major League Baseball MVP - and since has become the youngest player to hit 500 home runs. He was marveled in the public eye. He also lied in that same eye about taking steroids. Granted, steroids were not illegal in MLB at the time of A-Rod’s admitted usage, but obviously A-Rod lied in order to manage the impression the public possessed in regard to his athletic prowess. He wanted his accomplishments and character to appear more impressive than they actually are.

Honesty is a virtue. Not all adults are virtuous. Perhaps like Mark Twain’s assessment, referring back to George Washington’s proclamation: “I am different from Washington; I have a higher, grander standard of principle.  Washington could not lie.  I can lie, but I won't.”

Sounds like a wise path for us all.

AR

OH, LORD, IT'S HARD TO BE HUMBLE

I had 2 interesting visitors last week. They were warm, amiable, and eager to share. It was fascinating to listen to them... fascinating as it is to converse with those who speak with a distinct, respectful passion... like those who’ve gone before us... Jimmy V., Og Mandino, and women’s basketball’s Kay Yow. Their passion prompted them to share... to hopefully sharpen those around them. These specific 2 expected to sharpen whoever answered my door.

As the religious walkers stood at my door, they found themselves encamped on tangents that diluted their message. In my desire to encourage them to hone the message (and thus said passion), I decided to gently challenge them: “You know, if I felt called to walk door-to-door, sharing hopeful news, knowing this may be my lone opportunity for personal interaction with a specific person, I would attempt to steer the conversation to what’s most important. What’s most important that you would have me know?”

Still amiable. Still eager. But their ambiguity fogged the dialogue. So I again repeated, “What’s most important to you? Is it most important that I have an authentic faith and know who God is - or is it more important that I join your church?”

God bless my 2 visitors, but they still rambled in some kind of familiar-talking-point kind of answer. I tried once more: “I mean no disrespect, but the 2 of you are not answering my question. Let me make it easier for you: do you equate having a saving faith with being a member of your specific church?”

Finally, with great hesitation (and after 1 more acknowledgement of not answering my question), the more experienced of the visitors said, “Ok, I’ll answer you,” and amid her discomfort she said, “No, BUT this is the best way I’ve found to have a saving faith.” Ah, finally... an answer. After encouraging my newfound friend to refrain from starting sentences with the word “but,” I decided to be a little transparent...

“My friends... I have great respect for what you are doing. I have great respect for your passion and for your desire to know God and make Him known. But I get frustrated with your denomination because there exists such a perceived arrogance - perhaps unintentionally - but an arrogance is presented that assumes your manmade denomination has God all figured out... I can’t tell if it’s more important to you if I have an authentic faith or become a member of your church.”

As the dialogue continued respectfully but now building in intensity, my friend tried to share with me that biblically, there exists support for only one “people group” that has ever rightly worshipped God. I then asked how she reconciled such teaching with the intentional grafting in of the Gentiles - IN ADDITION to the Jewish nation. (The stunned look on her face told me the talking points failed to cover that question.)

There are lots of aspects we could dwell on from this encounter. There were more words, waves of comic relief, and multiple moments in which I was thankful for my equipping study of the Hebrew and Greek. But knowing God is at work in our lives in ways that speak loudest to each of us - that are thus different for each of us, my conclusion today is simply this: there is no place for arrogance within authentic faith. Authentic faith means loving God back for all He has done for us. That’s not an arrogant thought. Rather, it should blow us away.

My husband was funny. He said to watch out. “They’ll either be back with their supervisor or they made a note on their way out... ‘We’re never going back to her house again!’”

Either way is fine with me. They will be welcomed with warmth. Not to mention humility.

AR

JUST BRILLIANT!

We are such smart people. Amazing, are we not? We are so good. So wise. Sometimes seemingly brilliant! Our society is absolutely superior when it comes to knowing it all. Should we hit what could merely be termed a temporary mind block, surely some Jobs or Gates will tinkle with the technology and miraculously save the day.

One of my favorite places dripping with humble astuteness is this keen ability to assess the value of life. Perhaps better articulated: the ability to accurately pinpoint one’s “quality of life.” Yes, we are amazing!

The University of Vermont has created an integrated definition of the “quality of life” that describes eleven objective human "needs" that are moderated by subjective human "wants."

The CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) advocates the HRQOL (Health-Related Quality of Life), a tool for medical professionals to measure the effects of disorders, disability, and disease to assist in guiding policy and intervention.

And lest we not notice, in the congressionally-written stimulus/spending/spending/stimulus package, at least prior to Friday night’s passage, there was a section buried within the 1,071 pages that made certain healthcare provisions contingent on a subjective government evaluation of that quality. (FYI: for the record, it is utterly irresponsible for any congressman or woman to have voted for OR against that package without reading its entire pages.)

The challenge with man believing he possesses the ability to discern quality of life is that man could be wrong. Man is not God. Quality of life is not based on how many video systems we own or $3.70 lattes we can buy in a week (granted, my young adolescents would perhaps vehemently dispute the first of those 2). Quality of life is not measured via materialism. It is not measured by wealth, prosperity, and or even appearance or abundance. I would add that an accurate diagnosis cannot be made even with acknowledgement of the aforementioned disorder, disability, or disease. Life is certainly more challenging when confronting gut-wrenching hardship, but that does not compute to an automatic lessening of quality.

There were two friends whose primary years of influence paralleled one another. One was gorgeous. One was not. One was surrounded by wealth. The other surrounded by sickness. Yet while one avoided the limelight, the other could not shake its publicizing rays. When their years ended, one died with a bang. The other went out with a whimper.

Diana, Princess of Wales, died on August 31, 1997. 5 days later Agnesë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu, Mother Teresa, passed away. Based on our measurements, the royalty, celebrity, and prosperity of Princess Diana’s life (minus the infidelity and hounding paparazzi) would still have produced a significantly high score on the quality of life assessment. Mother Teresa, who devoted her life to showing grace and mercy to “the poorest of the poor” - and I am sure had some quiet sense of divine satisfaction - well, I am sorry, but she would have scored fairly low.

Yes, we are such smart people. Amazing, are we not?

AR

THE LOCUS OF MORAL RESPONSIBILITY

Americans are a feisty bunch. We like to cast credit and blame on the most obvious target. (See Cubs fans: Steve Bartman, 2003 NLCS, Game 6.)

And so in order to clear our personal resumes of any wrongdoing or even unintentional error, we assign all responsibility on someone else. Call it part of the “victim mentality” which permeates our culture. “It’s not my fault this happened.” If you have a teenager in your household, perhaps you have witnessed significant proclamations firsthand.

President Obama cannot alone solve our financial crisis. Strong in leadership as he may be, no large red and yellow “S” is concealed on his undershirt. Just as true, however, is that President Bush is not to blame for our financial crisis. This may be contrary to recent rhetoric, but the more we politicize economic policy, the greater is the probability that we will lack discernment in assessing appropriate responsibility. Bush certainly committed multiple mistakes (as all Presidents will do - again, back to the no red and yellow “S”), but destabilizing our economy was not one of them.

The best explanation I’ve heard to date comes from Barron’s, with an editorial this week written by Scott S. Powell, a senior VP at ELP Capital and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution. Powell writes:

“Today's problems have their roots in programs and financial instruments that shifted the locus of moral responsibility away from private individuals and institutions to wider circles that were understood to end with a government guarantee. Heads of the top banks and financial institutions could approve substandard home-mortgage underwriting -- prone to increased default -- because those loans could be securitized by Wall Street and sold off to investors or to government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs), with no likely recourse to the financial institution of origin.

Our present crisis began in the 1970s, during the Carter administration, with passage of the Community Reinvestment Act to stem bank redlining and liberalize lending in order to extend home ownership in lower-income communities. Then in the 1990s, the Department of Housing and Urban Development took a fateful step by getting the GSEs to accept subprime mortgages. With Fannie and Freddie easing credit requirements on loans they would purchase from lenders, banks could greatly increase lending to borrowers unqualified for conventional loans. In the name of extending affordable housing, this broadened the acceptability of risky loans throughout the financial system.”

Powell makes a great point, certainly an enlightening one for those of us who are novices in evaluating economic policy. Let me add one more encouragement from Mr. Powell:

“George Washington also warned against excessive partisanship, which distracts public councils and enfeebles public administration. Rather than blaming the party in power or the party formerly in power, the nation should stop living in denial of the mistakes of both parties.”

Did you hear that? The mistakes of both parties. Enough said.

AR

THE KING OF HEARTS

Each of us is guilty. We all have done it, whether transparency reigns or not. History has proven we all have our ugly moments. We all have clamored for one to lead us... to save us... to enable our eternal hope.

See Cleveland.
Oakland.
Even San Francisco.

Every year when the snow thaws and April arrives, there is a ground swelling of support for a youthful man to finally direct us to greatness. Ah, the NFL Draft. Perhaps finally a new, franchise quarterback can lead us to the end zone! (Let the record show, in order to be a successful savior, he will need to lead you there more than once. Again, see Cleveland, Oakland, and San Francisco.)

Wait. To be fair we must acknowledge that Atlanta’s Matt Ryan actually did seemingly save the day in 2008. But after years of inhaling much of the Vick inequities, Ryan was a refreshing rookie who led his Falcons to the promised playoffs - if not the land.

The historical reality is that people clamor for a king.

The Romans clamored for the great Cincinnatus. The Sicilians clamored for “the General,” Giuseppe Garibaldi. And lest you are on the edge of your seats, ready to pounce, thinking I may again address the perceived Obama love affair, we should acknowledge that many of us were just as guilty with the election of President Bush. “Now that a conservative Christian is in the White House... now we can finally save America!”

In approximately 1050 B.C., the ground swelling rose to its maximum voice. The people had spiritual leaders, men and women to guide them, helping them see the world rightly and give God credit for his creation, but they didn’t have a “king.” “Give us a king to rule us!” the people chanted. If only we had a king, those hopes would ring true. They were told that a king could not save them. A king could not do what only God can do. We should never put more faith in a man than in the one who created man. But the people ignored wisdom. They continued to mandate, “We want a king so we can be like everyone else!” Adhering to the wants of the people as opposed to the wisdom of one greater, the leading prophet of the land surrendered to their wishes. Yet he eerily added, “The day will come when you will cry in desperation because of this king you so much want for yourselves. But don't expect God to answer.” Because their trust was displaced, their prayers were discarded.

No one man (or woman, Hillary and Sarah) can save America. No conservative Christian. No liberal, independent, franchise quarterback, or even global warming aficionado. No man can do what only God can do. So why, as a people, do we continue to look for love in all the wrong places? What makes us clamor for a king?

Ok, it’s confession time. Among other loyalties, I am a Bengals’ fan. Can’t wait to see who we draft.

AR

LESS IS MORE

With the new buzz line substantiating appropriations being whether or not jobs are created (and remembering that the corner lemonade stand will put at least 2 of my 3 kids to work), I felt an honest look at job creation may be beneficial.

No matter your opinion in regard to what should be trimmed from the current stimulus package - which reasonable people differ on - remember that the health of our economy is primarily measured by the totality of consumption, gross investment, government spending, and the difference between exports and imports. Republicans and Democrats have historically attempted various means to increase that conglomerate number, and they have not always adhered to strict party lines. Job creation (including the lemonade stands) is only one aspect of the equation. Hence, to assist in the debate, perhaps the following would be insightful to our astute congressional representatives:

TOP 10 JOBS WE COULD USE LESS OF!

10. Network marketers
9. Politically correct police
8. Butter producers (...have you seen lately how many choices are on the shelves?)
7. Reality TV show participants (...reality? ..."you mean I can meet my future husband here?")
6. Poker players (...how many “World Series of Poker” can ESPN actually show in a week?)
5. Prosperity Gospel preachers (...uh, there’s a little more to faith than “everything will be wonderful and you will be rich and incredibly, materially blessed...”)
4. Stupid blog writers (...whoops...)
3. Pornographic web site developers
2. Moms having babies hoping to profit

And #1... drum roll please...

Inaccurate weathermen! Sorry, but the 9” of snow that fell in 5 hours at my house last week, that NO ONE predicted, was a little on the hilarious side. Can we please include in the stimulus package sending some of them back to school??

Just a commentary... with all due respect, of course... still shoveling...

AR

A LOSS FOR HUMANITY

Nearly 30 years ago, my family shared an unforgettable weekend. First was that slimy hotel. Ok... I admit it... ask my husband. I’m a hotel snob. My idea of “roughing it” is a stay without the amenities. I should probably warn you... I have also been accused of being a Starbucks and Big Ten snob. I would debate the Big Ten one... I mean, some of the arrogance oozing from perennial winning programs compels me to cheer for the underdog - regardless of conference. For this memorable weekend, we were in SEC territory...

Down in the heart of Georgia, we first went to Plains. As my political roots were deepening, I desired to visit the hometown of President Jimmy Carter, in office at the time, and taste the produce of the man who campaigned for the 1970 Georgia Governorship as the “Peanut Farmer.” Just for the record - with no intended disrespect to the Carter family - my peanut discernment capabilities were underdeveloped at the time; hence, I wasn’t quite able to grasp the uniqueness, save for the label hailing from Plains.

The next stop was undoubtedly the most memorable. My stepfather drove us to Koinonia Farms in Americus, Georgia, just a few country miles from the Carter abode. Koinonia was a farm community founded by Clarence Jordan in 1942. In the 1960’s, a man by the name of Millard Fuller came to Koinonia. Together with Jordan, he established Partnership Housing, to provide capital and thus housing for the poor. This would serve as the birth for Habitat for Humanity International. Habitat’s goal was to build simple, decent houses for low-income families using volunteer labor and donations, and requiring repayment only of the cost of the materials used. No interest was charged and no profit was made... An amazing thought when you consider that Fuller was a self-made millionaire by age 29, as a successful entrepreneur and attorney. But according to Habitat, “As his finances flourished, his health and marriage crumbled. To save their marriage, the Fullers decided to begin anew. They sold all that they owned, gave the money to the poor and in their searching, landed at Koinonia.” Millard and his wife, Linda, realized that some things were more important than wealth, and they surrendered their lifestyle for something better and more.

Serving with multiple board members through the years, including both Carter and my stepfather, the interracial ministry grew exponentially under Millard’s leadership. Yet he and Linda still had time to welcome us to their dinner table that weekend in Georgia. That was the kind of man Millard was, my stepfather would say... a visionary who put his faith first... a man whose faith played itself out practically and powerfully in his life.

Millard shockingly died Tuesday night at the age of 74. He will be buried like his mentor, Jordan, in a crate on a hill, with no significant marker for his grave. Interviewed the morning after his death, Linda added one more thing: “Millard would not want people to mourn his death," she said. "He would be more interested in having people put on a tool belt and build a house for people in need."

Thank you, Millard, for that weekend in Georgia and for the example of a life lived well.

AR

STIMULATING

Fact: I am not an economist. Perhaps some of you are. Granted, I did take 4-5 econ classes in the Krannert School of Management and an advanced class in regulatory policy, but my credentials don’t substantiate an expertise. Hence, let’s examine the stimulus from a non-expert perspective.

Senate proposal H.R.1 is intended to create jobs and grow the economy. It is professed to be a stimulus package - not an appropriations bill. As best I can discern reading through the proposal (best advised as creative bathroom literature), as of Monday, the bill now estimated at approximately $900 billion, contains the following:

$17 million for student loans
$40 million for health insurance for the unemployed
$50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts
$50 million for National Cemetery monument repairs
$75 million for smoking cessation programs
$150 million for honey bee insurance
$150 million for the Smithsonian
$200 million for earthquake and volcano monitoring
$200 million for National Mall repavement
$276 million for new computers at the State Department
$300 million to improve teacher quality
$355 million for sexually transmitted disease education
$400 million for global-warming research
$650 million for more digital TV conversion coupons
$650 million for government employee car purchases
$870 million for influenza pandemic preparation
$1 billion for Amtrak
$2 billion for child-care subsidies
$2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects
$6 billion for mass transit systems
$7 billion for modernizing federal facilities
$8 billion for renewable energy funding
$20 billion for food stamps
$30 billion for fixing bridges or other highway projects
$36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits
$40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects
$83 billion for Earned Income Credit (for people who don’t pay income tax)
$89 billion for Medicaid

According to the outline of the current bill, monies will be distributed to persons who do not pay taxes and to illegal aliens.

Something is running amok. While our President is trying to usher in “a new era of responsibility,” the CSD’s (“Congressional Stimulus Designers”) are proposing multiple expenditures, many of which fail the litmus test for job creation AND responsibility. Also, Monday’s Washington Post, LA Times, Cincinnati Enquirer and no doubt multiple others report a rapidly swelling number of state lobbyists eerily similar to those eager children waiting in that December photo line at Macy’s. They want their Red Ryder BB guns, too!

Friends, research the New Deal. Research what worked and what did not. Research the expenditures which may have perpetuated the instability as opposed to stimulated the recovery. And then ask yourself: is the current bill in the Senate designed to stimulate the American economy? Or is it designed to advance a party agenda? Republican or Democrat does not matter; it should not matter. It’s time to discard the congressional red, padded suits, listen to Obama’s call for responsibility, and do what’s best and right for the entire American people.

AR

COMMENT COMMENTARY

From www.dictionary.com, definitions 1 and 2 of 6:

o⋅pin⋅ion   [uh-pin-yuhn] –noun
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

Origin: 1250–1300; ME < OF < L opīniōn- (s. of opīniō), deriv. of opīnārī to opine

Is each of us entitled to our own opinion? Most would offer a resounding “yes.” Perhaps the reason for said justification lies in the second half of definition #1 above - that there exists “grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.”

That means that whether you are Rush Limbaugh, Nancy Pelosi, (lest I say it) Rod Blagojevich, proponents or opponents of Proposition 8, or yes, even the Intramuralist, you have a right to your opinion. It also means that we, (lest I say it again) that I, could be wrong. Egad.

I am encouraging you to comment on this blog with that in mind: the reality that each of us could be wrong. But I am also encouraging you to comment on this blog with the goal of sharpening one another. We can learn from those whose perspective begins from a different angle.

The purpose of the Intramuralist is not to make everyone think like me (not as if that would be such a terrible thing to do!). But the purpose is to prompt respectful dialogue. With respectful dialogue, we can model to the Washington partisans, media pundits, and Hollywood postulators that it is ok to listen to one another. It is ok to learn from one another. It is ok to admit you don’t have “it all figured out.” We can model an intellectual humility that is productive and beneficial to us all.

So today I invite you to join me. I invite you to join me by commenting on this blog regularly as we model to the rest of the world what respectful dialogue looks like. Simply below the blog entry which sparks a reaction in you, hit the link expressing the number of comments pertaining to that entry. That will take you to a window where comments are solicited. You may comment as a Google account holder or simply anonymously. Then your comment will be forwarded to me, and I will publish it, assuming one criteria: your comment is expressed in a way which is respectful to persons who feel differently than you.

That is what the Washington partisans, media pundits, and Hollywood postulators have yet to learn.

Just a commentary...

AR