Living word by word

the widow's money order

 My favorite Obamaniac posted a question over the weekend about Obama’s reference in his South Carolina victory speech about a woman who sent a money order for $3.01. Read the responses. . .it’s a great commentary on what happens when “compulsive textual critics” meet people who actually have to get money orders at a grocery store.

 

 

Obamania

In 2002 (or was it ’03?), in the fog of a new baby and not long after 9/11, my in-laws, who live in central Illinois, called up all excited about a candidate running for Senate. “You should send him some money,” they advised. We did, but not without a bit of good-natured joking about our family’s (non-) ability to pick winners. I mean, Karl Rove & Co. were running the table, playing on people's fears, and this guy’s name was Barack Obama?

Others have written much better things about Obama and the issues, and, especially, his religious views. See Chris’ take on Obama’s Neibuhrian theology, Mark Kleiman's comments on his gutsy defense of human rights in the Illinois Senate, and Jonathan’s legitimate questions about a first 100 days of an Obama presidency.

All of my response so far is purely emotional and anecdotal, such as the fact that the most outspoken Republican of my last parish is now active in Obama’s campaign in Minnesota. When Obama says, “We are one people,” he makes me believe, or at least really, really want to believe.

amazing lives

I know, it’s probably too late, but if you can possibly beg, borrow or steal a copy of last Sunday’s New York Times magazine, it’s worth the effort. Their annual collection of profiles of people who died this year, many of whom you haven’t ever heard of, is always a good read. The one that astonished me was of Andree De Jongh, a Belgian woman who, in her early 20’s, led a sort of underground railroad  out of occupied Europe, over the mountains into Spain.

It’s an amazing life to read about, and even more shocking to me that I’d never heard of her before.

Sesame Street

The New York Times issues a list, weekly, of their most-emailed stories. They are usually great reads.

Now they’ve issued a list of top ten for 2007. It includes recipes, an op-ed by Stephen Colbert, and, of course, a piece by Michael Pollan. But number one? A magazine piece by Viriginia Heffernan about the newly released “vintage” Sesame Street episodes, in which it is revealed that some content is now deemed inappropriate for small children.

I read this story in the magazine weeks ago and thought about blogging on it. Advent got in the way, but it struck me as a great commentary on the assumptions we make about children and what they need—then and now. Then, Cookie Monster was just every three-year-old’s id in action, no impulse control and lovable for it. Now, he is a reformed sugar addict who advises us to eat our carrots too. Then, Alistair Cookie had a pipe. Now, kids’ parents don’t watch Masterpiece Theater either, so the whole thing makes no sense. Then, Snuffleupagus was simply an oversized imaginary friend; now, we are too worried that parents seem out of touch, so he’s visible to anyone.

What’s fascinating is how this story is the TOP NYTimes story of the whole year! Who are these people reading this and passing it on? Gen X’ers like me who learned to read via Muppets? My parents’ generation trying to figure out their grandkids? Incredulous Gen Y’ers who can’t believe that Elmo wasn’t begotten of eternal God? I’m not sure what this story’s popularity means for the country, but it's a fascinating window into who reads the Times.

Bali

    If you're only reading our local paper, you'd hardly know there was an international climate change conference going on in Bali.
    UN agreements and international diplomacy don't generally get my heart a-thumping, but read this blog's eyewitness account of the international pressure that finally led to the United States' joining in on the "compromise language" for future reductions in greenhouse gases. It's clear that the U.S delegation was doing anything but leading. . . but at least they were pulled along by our global peers.

a voice in the wilderness

Just a question: what's the difference between a prophetic voice in the wilderness and a pathetic voice crying out? I mean, really:  with our biblical hindsight we see John the Baptist prepared the way for Jesus. In his own time, he probably seemed like an odd, irritating -- albeit pious -- crank who got his head cut off by the Empire.  In our culture which loves the individual hero, we can sometimes get confused about the strong individual swimming upstream. Sometimes we think we're being the "leaders of the free world" and fail to notice that no one is following anymore. . .perhaps because they see the cliff in front of us better than we do.

I think of this because of the news that the U.S. is now the sole holdout from a UN process to replace the Kyoto protocol with a new international agreement to fight climate change. We're the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, and the only ones not willing to cooperate in change. I am so ashamed.

Meanwhile, it's snowing again (!) in Minnesota. I'm sure retailers think this is bad for Christmas business. I say, bring it on!

someone else's ideas

I haven't been in a blogging mood much lately, due to too much stress, poor health, and general crankiness. But my dear husband continues his role in reading things I never get around to, including the Same Facts (as in "everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but  not their own facts") blog which one of our attorney friends occasionally contributes to. I especially appreciated Mark Kleiman's retort to another non-religious blogger on how to characterize American religiosity in general. Read his rundown of Democratic responses to a religious question. One doesn't come away too encouraged about theological conversation on a public scale. (Of course, the question posed was a little asinine). On the other hand, we've always known that politics is a bad forum for theological conversation. At least Kleiman recognizes that there are faithful people who think about both politics and theology, without resorting to soundbytes.

the bridge

My ties to the recent bridge collapse in Minneapolis are few, but it is a small town, so of course I know people who would normally have been commuting that way, but didn't that day, people who were working at the hospital that was nearest, people who did go over that bridge, just not at 6:05. Oh yes, and the daughter of one of our ELCA pastors was on the school bus that fell with the bridge.

There's been a fair amount of justifiable civic pride in recent days as the stories of first responders are told, and people realize how much more chaotic it could have been. This piece from the star tribune said it well. Minnesota is going through a lot of difficult changes in recent years, but it is still largely a place where people look out for one

Another piece that out of town folks may appreciate and won't see on national news: this slide show with the story of a bike commuter who was on hand at the scene at the time of the collapse. It's worth registering for your 7-day pass on the site.

climate change

A few weeks ago I wrote in Journey with Jesus about "the Dial and the Switch," and there certainly has been a "switch" in the amount of media attention to climate change in recent months. This is either

a. Good, because it is finally a mainstream issue

b. Bad, because more evidence of climate change means it really is happening, and faster than we expected

c. both

I'm going for c, but I am VERY encouraged by the Supreme Court's ruling yesterday which affirms the EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases. YES!! It was a 5-4 split, so I'm praying for Ruth Bader Ginsberg's health a lot these days.

What continues to baffle me are those who say, "yes, there is climate change, but it's not human-caused." If you accept the science that we have a warming globe -- and only the fringe does not --, regardless of the cause, would you not want to ameliorate its affects anyway? Or are the naysayers so fatalist that they are content to let whoever suffers suffer, no questions asked?  Here is where the role of the U.S. Christian community becomes vital, I think, because as Americans we both contribute more carbon to the environment than most, AND we are in the best position to save ourselves. It will take a firm commitment from those who believe we should serve the "least of these" to turn this around so that the global impact of climate change is addressed.

troublemakers

Don't mess with poets. That's the way firedoglake sums up the Poets Against War movement.  Laura Bush's comment that this had become a "political event instead of a literary one" reminds me of Larry Woiwode's comment on MPR when Governor Pawlenty refused to back having a Minnesota poet laureate. The governor rationalized that it was unfair to  the other arts to privilege poetry. Woiwode rightly pointed out that human beings govern with language; we use words to make law, to debate policy, to discuss the common good. Lawmakers use words, not music or sculpture. When those who govern start demeaning language with jargon and half-truths, you're darn right that poets are going to respond.