From the same site as the previous entry... What Part of Thanksgiving Are You?
You Are the Stuffing
You're complicated and complex, yet all your pieces fit together. People miss you if you're gone - but they're not sure why. What Part of Thanksgiving Are You?
Just a whimsical thing. Here's my result...
You Are the Investigator5 You're independent - and a logical analytical thinker. You love learning and ideas... and know things no one else does. Bored by small talk, you refuse to participate in boring conversations. You are open minded. A visionary. You understand the world and may change it.Now, i'm off to change the world. Maybe.
I had a fun day yesterday hanging out with Jack. The gals all went to an all-day free concert put on by the local country radio station, leaving us guys to fend for ourselves. Since Jack's not yet into a day-long of tracking fantasy football stats, we went to see the season's hit movie The Incredibles.
I'm sure it's cliche by now to describe the film as incredible. So i won't. But i checked with my friend Roget, and he said i could call it amazing, marvelous, fabulous, and wonderful, among other things. It's really quite good. I liked it better than any of the recent animated movies, other than perhaps Shrek and the Toy Story movies.
Holly Hunter is just terrific as the Mom, Helen Parr. Edna (voiced by the director/screenwriter), the diminutive seamstress to superheroes, was also very good.
But this movie is about the action, and the themes. One theme is the sense of loss that frequently comes as you age, thinking that your incredible days are all behind you. How we all long to be special, break free from the chains of the mundane. Thoreau's quiet desperation. It's a glorious thing, then, when the spirit to save the world is resurrected.
The other main theme is one of the family bond, with the Parr family as metaphor for either our own family or the larger families of communities or the church. A family bonded by love, and saved only by each one lending his or her unique special gift.
Jack also enjoyed the movie, and was such a little gentleman. Never fussing even though we were probably the only ones not to get snacks. No bathroom breaks, which means he probably didn't have a long-enough moment of boredom to think about it.
After the movie, Jack wanted a McDonald's Happy Meal (chicken nuggets, fries, and Sprite -- always the same), with its Incredibles toy. We brought it home and hung out together until Julie and gang came home.
P.S. If you liked The Incredibles, check out Brad Bird's other movie, Iron Giant.
Testing out the ability to post pictures here. This one is of the kids, taken about a year ago. Jack looks like a natural urchin, doesn't he?
I was all prepared to write an entry on this topic. Started doing some more research on the web, and ran across this webpage...
Myth and Reality about Homosexuality
It really encapsulates most or all of what i was going to say, and does it better and more completely. So, instead of writing my own essay, i'll ask that you peruse the link, or consider these excerpts:
Myth: Research shows that there is a "gay gene." Homosexuality is genetic.
Reality: Homosexuality is not a genetically encoded condition. Contrary to media hype, there is no conclusive or compelling empirical evidence showing any absolute biological, genetic, or hormonal causation for homosexuality. Homosexual activist and molecular biologist Dean Hamer’s study claiming the existence of a homosexual gene has been scientifically discredited. Studies that claim to prove homosexuality is genetic have been purposefully designed from a homosexual advocacy perspective and seek to convince society that homosexuality is innate, psychologically normal, and thus socially desirable.
Footnote 80. "Sexual orientation, once thought to be an unchanging sexual trait, is actually quite flexible for many people, changing as a result of therapy for some, ministry, for others and spontaneously for still others." (Warren Throckmorton and Mark A. Yarhouse, "Ethical Issues in Attempts to Ban Reorientation Therapies," American Psychological Association, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol. 39, No. l, June 2002, 66-75) 30% of those who enter treatment for homosexuality with an experienced therapist are able to achieve a heterosexual adjustment. An additional 30% are able to control their homosexual behavior, although they do not develop a sexual attraction to females. (Warren. Throckmorton, (1996) Efforts to modify Sexual Orientation: A review of outcome literature and ethical issues, Journal of Mental Health and Counseling 20, 4: 283-305)
Emphases are in the original.
Don't give in to the incessant drumbeats of a Godless society, foisting untruths to society's ultimate detriment. We shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall set us free.
Early predictions for the nominations for President for 2008, the first year in a long time that no sitting President or VP will be running for the office.
Democrat (assuming they want to win): Evan Bayh / Mark Warner
Bayh is currently a Senator from Indiana, and a former Indiana Governor. He heads the Democratic Leadership Council, a moderate Democratic group. He may not have enough foreign policy experience or gravitas (not saying he doesn't; i just don't know), but he does score high in likeability, electoral positioning (could deliver Indiana), and seems a decent fellow.
Warner is the current Governor of Virginia, another red state that could turn blue. Also relatively moderate.
Others to watch: Ed Rendell (Gov of Pennsylvania), Bill Richardson (Gov of New Mexico), Rod Blagojevich (Gov of Illinois), Joe Biden (Delaware Senator - VP only)
It won't be (or shouldn't be): Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama (newly elected Senator from Illinois), John Edwards.
Clinton has way too much baggage, and would energize the right like we've never seen. Obama is too inexperienced, and is nothing more than the flavor of the day. His day may come, but it won't be 2008. Edwards' political career is done.
Republican: George Voinovich / Bill Owens
Voinovich is a sitting Senator from Ohio. Like Bayh, he is also a former Governor of his state. He should be on the ticket one way or another.
Bill Owens is the current Governor of Colorado, and is considered a rising star in the party.
Others to watch: John McCain (a decent VP choice if he doesn't get the nomination), Chuck Hagel (Nebraska Senator - VP only, and only if not paired with another Senator), Bob Taft (Gov of Ohio & only if Voinovich is not on the ticket), Elizabeth Dole, and Rudy Guliani.
It won't be: Jeb Bush (he said he would not run), Ah-nold (no way a Constitutional Amendment passes in enough time, if ever), Bill Frist (a good guy, but i just don't see it)
If i didn't mention your favorite candidate, go here to see others. Let me also say in closing that i haven't studied closely these candidates' politics, and do not necessarily know where they precisely fall on the left-right spectrum. This look was mostly about perceived resumes to date. I'm sure i'll be set straight sooner or later.
Election Day lately has become like Super Bowl Sunday. Lots of anticipation leading up to it, then hours glued to the TV seeing how it turns out.
Day began early, at Julie & i wanted to get to the polls as they opened at 630am. Unfortunately, this was a very popular idea, and by the time we arrived, the line looked to be about 2 hours long. I went on to work, but Julie stuck around. She made it out around 815am.
I came back to vote just after lunch, and was surprised to find almost no line. I was in & out in 15 minutes.
Came home to follow the day's events on TV and the web. Started reading all the web & blog chatter about the exit polls, and how they were looking VERY good for Kerry. Then saw that the online betting sites were switching heavily to Kerry's favor (Bush had been the favorite for a while), so much that the markets couldn't really keep up with the line. By evening newstime, Bush was listed as a 3-1 underdog.
Knowing this, it was easy to read the unspoken sentiments of the news anchors and pundits. The Bush camp was reportedly "subdued", and the Kerry camp "optimistic". It was going to be a John Kerry night, just as i had predicted.
The first states polls closed at 7pm, with the key indicator the state of Virginia. Networks said it was too close to call. Not good news. Then, at 730pm, we had NC. Also too close to call. What? There's no way that Bush could lose NC.
So, at this point, i sought out the exit polls online, finding them in great detail on CNN's website. I immediately noticed the disparity between men and women. Not in who they voted for, but in what % of the poll respondents were men, and what % were women. Some of the state exit polls had a 10-15 point gap between men and women. So, women were being over-weighted if you just looked at the state totals. This was skewing the numbers significantly in Kerry's favor (since men tend to support Bush more strongly).
There were probably other skewings in the weightings. Most notably, i expect, was the weight given to self-described Republicans. Historically, more folks call themselves Democrats than Republicans. But, yesterday, for the first time in maybe forever, the two groups were equally represented at the polls.
Also, take a look at how Bush fared with the given demographic segments compared to 2000. He improved with both men (+2) and women (+5). He improved with Blacks and Hispanics. He improved all over the board. In fact, when you look at the exit polls this way, the nationwide results -- a 3 point Bush victory -- follow quite naturally.
So this analysis was my first inkling of hope. The second was a Bush operative reporting on county-by-county returns in Florida (a state where the exit polls predicted a Bush loss), saying that Bush was improving on his performance in 2000. My mood begins to lighten. There's a spring in my channel switching.
As the real votes start to roll in, there are no real early surprises. Red states stay red; blue states stay blue. The predictions were right -- just watch Ohio. And we watched Ohio until about 2 in the morning before turning in for the night. It looked pretty much over from my reading of the Ohio vote. With Ohio, Bush had at least a 269-269 tie, and would then win in the House of Representatives tie-breaker (assume no faithless electors). And New Mexico was looking good.
Just got a few hours sleep, as the phone rang at 6-something am (one of Caroline's friends). Once i was awake, i had to turn the news back on, and see what had happened. Still no resolution. I was in no shape to go to work, so continued watching until Kerry conceded just before lunch.
OK, i was wrong about the election. And it wasn't a psychological hedge. At least i don't think it was.
The only state i missed was Ohio.
More later
