America should apologize to Japan: now WE have a God Emperor that can't be looked upon!

"When the Emperor passed by we had to bow our heads very low. We were made to believe that the Emperor was too awe inspiring for ordinary humans to look upon directly."

Hirohito was the last to sit on the Chrysanthemum throne and be considered a god upon Earth. It used to be taught to every small child during the long centuries of Imperial Japan that they must not dare look at the Emperor... else they would be struck blind. Many among the Japanese were still gripped by that sense of fear and awe, even long years after Hirohito relinquished any claims of divinity following Japan's surrender to the United States after World War II.

(The Emperor is still a big kahuna over there though. You know he's the ONLY person in Japan who by law cannot eat fugu? I think that's pretty neat... well unless Akihoto really WANTs to eat a fish loaded with lethal neurotoxin. But anyhoo...)

It took sixty years but I think we've finally done the Japanese one better here. Ya see, we aimed guns at them and told them to look. Now we aim guns at ourselves and are told not to look! Here's the lowdown from Scripps-Howard via The News-Herald newspaper...

01/11/2005

You're invited?
By: Joan Lowy

Be ready for metal detectors, personal body searches and the highest security in inauguration history
WASHINGTON - The nation's 55th presidential inauguration, the first to be held since 9/11, will take place this month under perhaps the heaviest security of any in U.S. history.

Dozens of federal and local law enforcement agencies and military commands are planning what they describe as the heaviest possible security. Virtually everyone who gets within eyesight of the president either during the Jan. 20 inauguration ceremony at the U.S. Capitol or the inaugural parade down Pennsylvania Avenue later in the day will first go through a metal detector or receive a body pat-down.
Thousands of police officers and military personnel are being brought to Washington from around the country for the four-day event. Sharpshooters will be deployed on roofs, while bomb-sniffing dogs will work the streets. Electronic sensors will be used to detect chemical or biological weapons.
Anti-abortion protesters have been warned to leave their crosses at home. Parade performers will have security escorts to the bathroom, and they've been ordered not to look directly at President Bush or make any sudden movements while passing the reviewing stand...

(snip)

Thousands of performers - marching bands, color guards, pompon dancers, hand bell-ringers, drill teams on horseback and Civil War re-enactors - will be bused early in the morning to the Pentagon parking lot across the Potomac in Virginia. While performers disembark and go through metal detectors, bomb-sniffing dogs will search the buses.
Then everybody will get back on the buses for a trip to the National Mall, where they will spend most of the day in heavily guarded warming tents. Participants have been warned that they will not be allowed to leave the tents except to go to portable toilets accompanied by a security escort.
Other instructions given performers include a warning not to look directly at Bush while passing the presidential reviewing stand, not to look to either side and not to make any sudden movements.
"They want you to just look straight ahead," said Danielle Adam, co-director of the Mid American Pompon All Star Team from Michigan, which also performed in the 2001 inaugural parade.
"Last time we went security was really tight," Adam said. "This time we got almost like a book of things we needed to fill out beforehand."

I can see it now: some private-security muscle escorting a group of adults to a potty break while his hand's resting on his holster. Let's make them walkin in line hold each other's hand while we're at it. But what do you expect from a President who "sees America as we think about a 10-year-old child"?

What the hell kind of employee of the American people - that we pay the salary for, by the way - is it that tells us, any of us, not to look at him?

Come to think of it, what kind of employee spends $50 million to celebrate getting a job that pays only a couple million or so over a span of four years?

They don't have to worry about whether I'm looking or not, 'cuz I won't be tuning in for this thing anyway: got better things to do than watch an orgy fit for Bacchus.

Read More

There's nothing wrong with KILLING people who want to do this to your children...

Now, the tendency among a lot of folks - namely, some Christians - is that they'll hear about this and automatically assume it's the biblical "mark of the Beast". That's a pretty new idea, actually. Until ten years or so ago no student of the Bible (serious or... nevermind) had a clear picture of WHAT exactly this might be but with the advent of implantable chips, it's by far the most accepted theory of what the "mark" will be. Doesn't mean it will be the mark, but it sorta makes sense if it is. So this article at Wired News is no doubt gonna raise some eyebrows...

Brave New Era for Privacy Fight

By Kim Zetter

02:00 AM Jan. 13, 2005 PT

As the nation prepares for President Bush's inauguration next week, privacy activists on both sides of the political spectrum are bracing for a White House push to augment controversial domestic surveillance powers gained under the Patriot Act and other legislation passed since 9/11.

"The administration has made it clear that they do intend to continue their move to dramatically reduce privacy and constitutional protection for our citizens," said former Republican congressman Bob Barr, who now works as a speaker and consultant to organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union.

But surveillance legislation isn't the only concern on the minds of privacy advocates. They're also looking at technologies and services coming out of the commercial sector that could seriously affect civil liberties.

(snip)

Radio-frequency ID tags will become a bigger issue in 2005 as their use expands into new areas. Currently, stores and companies embed RFID tags in the packaging of drugs and commercial products to help track product supplies and update orders. But privacy advocates say the tags will soon be embedded in clothing and other products, raising concerns that the tracking might not stop when consumers leave a store with the product.

"The problem is not only about tracking the whereabouts of people but about linking associations," Rotenberg said. "Students with RFID student cards can be grouped and monitored in terms of who they're with."

Chips embedded beneath the skin will also become a larger issue.

Last October, the FDA approved an implantable computer chip that would contain medical information to assist with health care. The military has discussed implanting the chips in soldiers to speed up medical care, and Rotenberg said it's likely the chips will soon be used in prisoners, parolees and eventually children. The concern is with forced chipping, which would take away choice from individuals receiving the chips...

I don't care if it is the "mark of the Beast" or if it isn't: nobody is going to implant a chip into my body. For no other reason than because my identity is my own and is soveriegn only to God. And nobody is going to implant a chip into the bodies of my wife and children either. Or anyone else that I love.

And I swear to Almighty God that I will kill anyone who attempts to do so.

And so should you.

You are not a number.

You are not a piece of meat.

You are not a slave.

Your children are non-negotiable.

Your mind is your own.

You owe allegiance to no man, or party, or government, unless they've proven worthy of it in your own estimation.

You do not have to let "them" win.

You do not have to do something simply because "the government" or "the party" tells you to do that thing.

You win the only victory that really matters in this world when you say "no I won't" just one more time than they say "yes you will".

You are not alive today just to eat and sleep and screw and spend and be amused by far too little and then to die.

You do not deserve to be exploited by evil men.

You must be sober in mind and gentle in spirit.

You must give "them" every possible chance to retreat from their madness...

...And if they do not, you must stop them. And it does not matter who "they" are, at all.

There's only so much freedom in this country as there is a willingness of the people to put officials and agents of their government in a state of constant fear. That's the bulwark - that the Founding Fathers designed - against government growing too powerful. Or having jurisdiction over things that are now now, or ever will be, given to it.

"Against the law"? Yeah, what I just wrote could be easily construed as that. And I won't dodge around it: if anyone desires something like "chipping" my family or subjecting my children to state-imposed mental health screenings (read into that what you may), they should be made to understand that they can be killed for pursuing such insanity.

But from where I'm seeing things, breaking the law by warning those who feel empowered to do such a thing that they will die - and potentially doing the deed if they persist - is a very measly thing to worry about when you're dealing with the sanctity of your own and unique soul.

Read More

Disney REMAKING Tron?! Zap down Eisner's butt onto the Gaming Grid NOW!!

From a ransom note that will soon be delivered to Walt Disney execs:

dEar DiSNeY dOPEs,
wE ARe hoLdInG tIMoN aNd PUMbaA hoSTAge. dO NOt rEMAKe troN Or yoU WiLL nevER SEe tHEm aLIVE AGaIn iN fACt wE mAy BARbEcuE puMBAa FOr DiNNer hAHAhaHahAHAHahAHaHAhA.

If this is true... grrrrrrr...

So help me, I'll hire a squad of kamikaze Muppets to walk into Magic Kingdom with suitcase nukes if they screw this up.

Tron is one of those movies that, yeah it didn't make all that much money at the box office and it's not quite a cultural classic but you don't want anyone to mess with it either, because to enough of us it is a classic. Why that is, I can't explain but I think part of it has to do with the children of the first Star Wars generation, in the years after Episode IV: A New Hope and kids used to stare up into the night sky at the stars and wonder if fierce battles really were going on up there. Tron was like that but in a way more intimate: instead of far-out space it make you look at your desktop PC and wonder what really went on inside it: for all we knew, there WAS a teeny-tiny world behind the monitor where good and evil programs hashed it out. It was a neat thing to imagine, anyway. Personally though, Tron was the very first time I saw a movie on a VCR, over at my best friend Chad's house, and that's the kind of "techy first" that stays with a guy for life.

And let's face it, Tron was DECADES ahead of its time in a jillion ways: computer-generated effects, virtual reality (NOT the first in fiction though: that honor probably goes to "The Deadly Assassin" story on BBC's "Doctor Who")... and it was hella fun eye candy to look at. Yeah maybe not a classic, but in every way it's still perfect to a lot of people. And recently it was thought that Steven Lisberger was going to make a sequel that tied-in both the original movie and the Tron 2.0 game (more on that later).

That is not going to happen, if Disney has its way (can't Michael Eisner just go away now or at least NOT mess anything else up before he does leave in another year or so? Nope, instead of letting Lisberger make a REAL sequel, Disney is going to FUBAR-it all to shreds. From ComingSoon.net:

Tron Remake in the Works at Disney
Source: Variety
January 13, 2005

Disney has hired screenwriters Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal to write a remake of Tron, the 1982 Steven Lisberger film about a computer programmer who gets sucked into the parallel world of a computer program, reports Variety.

Klugman and Sternthal, who just wrote the historical epic Warrior for Gavin O'Connor to direct and Icon to produce, feel that the world has caught up with Lisberger's original concept, making it ripe for redo.

"We are contemporizing it, taking these ideas that were ahead of the curve and applying them to the present, and we feel the film now has a chance to resonate with a young audience," said Klugman.

Sternthal said the new conceit is that the computer programmer gets trapped in a cyberworld, so that the film can utilize the Internet...

Awright stop right there: folks, it's now patently obvious that the executives at Walt Disney Inc. do not even watch their own movies!! Because the Internet was in the original Tron: it wasn't called the Internet by name but... GEEZ how ELSE do they think that Master Control Program had managed to infiltrate EVERY major computer system on the planet?! Through a 300-baud modem and a CompuServe account?!

And if they really want to get particular about it, they don't have to re-invent the wheel at all because the world of Tron has already been brought into the 21st century from the dark ages of 1982: the Tron 2.0 computer game from Monolith. It's a FAITHFUL follow-up in every possible way: it "upgrades" the computer realm from 1982's technology to reflect the existence of things like PDAs and network firewalls without losing consistency with the designs of the movie, it's a thoughtful continuation of the original story, now 20-some years after the MCP was destroyed, and it's a heckuva lotta fun to play. Oh yeah, and Bruce Boxleitner returns as the voice of Alan (the creator of the Tron program) from the film. As far as I'm concerned (and many others if sales and good word from fans are any indication), Tron 2.0 is the sequel to the original... which does not merit a "remake" the least bit.

Sigh...

This just reeks.

I mean, this blows. It REALLY blows.

I can't begin to say how bad a thing this is for Disney to be even THINKING about.

Well, actually yeah I can say how bad a thing it is.

This pegs the needle on "Chris Knight's Bad-O-Meter".

There's only one thing that can be said about Mad Michael Eisner raping another great movie like this.

Children and those with weak hearts, leave the keyboard now. I'm gonna say it.

I'm going to say something that I keep in reserve, and bring out ONLY to describe the absolute worst of bad things.

I mean it. This is happening, now. No backsies.

Okay, everyone gone that doesn't need to bleed from the eyes?

Okay, here it comes...

Walt Disney Pictures' remaking of Tron SUCKS DONKEYS BALLS TO NO END!!!

There, I feel better now.

Okay, need to go: Timon is downstairs in his cage screaming for a cigarette. Don't ask where we've got Pumbaa.

Read More

We're Lost

The lovely Spousal Overunit and I finished watching a full episode of Lost for the very first time. It seems... intriguing.

I've absolutely NO idea what's supposed to be going on here though.

Read More

President Bush admits guidance from Lucifer in Washington Times interview

Okay, I'll admit that was bad. But it's not all that inaccurate either.

In an interview with the Washington Times earlier this week, Bush said that he didn't "see how you can be president without a relationship with the Lord."

Okay, which lord are we talking about here?

There is Our Lord and Savior. The Prince of Peace. He who sits at the right hand of God in Heaven. The Lamb slain for the sins of man so that we might live. The only begotten Son of God. The One Who was pierced, and yet shall every knee bow toward Him and confess that He is Lord.

At some point in the future. In the due time. But not just yet...

Because the lord of this world and present age is still on his throne. The one possessing all the glory and splendor of this carnal realm to do with as he pleases. The king of the air and darkness. The prince of high places. That one who would set his throne above the stars of God. The roaring lion that would consume all. The Morningstar. That great dragon who Christ acknowledged had been granted all authority over the nations and kingdoms of this world, toward whom all knees have at some time or another. Before some would now confess that he is their master no more.

One Lord offers forgiveness for all. The other lord brings accusation without ceasing.

There is the Lord that is ever confessed with joy and contentment with the countenance and tongue. There is also the lord that is rarely confessed outside the depths of a man's heart.

One is of the light. The other is even called "Light-bringer" but has been sentenced to darkness.

One Lord is the God of Heaven. The other lord is the god of fortresses.

One Lord brings with Him eternal life. The other lord can wrought only neverending damnation.

One Lord says that in His Father's house are many mansions, and He has prepared a place for us. The other lord would have us believe this realm is our true home, and offers us every imagined conceit of the flesh.

One Lord asks only for our repentance and faith in Him, in the assurance that we would join Him in ruling over all the heavens someday.

The other lord asks for nothing less than our soul, and can offer nothing but the fleeting powers and pleasures of this weary world... and he promises it Now. Now. Now.

Take a guess which one it is that most of history's leaders have taken as their own lord. Tell me, please, why I shouldn't be suspicious of anyone who merely talks of his "lord" without producing evidence that he is, indeed, an honorable and loyal servant.

You see, I just don't know who it is exactly that George W. Bush is referring to here. And though it is true that only God knows the true condition of the heart of a man, the fellowship in Christ is instructed - many times in scripture - to be wary of those who claim to be of Christ yet produce none of the fruits of the spirit. If the spirits are to be tested to determine if they are surely of God, how much moreso should we test those men who use their profession of Christ as enticement for us to trust them with things of this world?

Shoot man, that could be anyone that Bush is talking about as his lord.

As for which lord it is that Bush has taken as his sovereign... well, there are suspicions, but I won't delve into those: the proofs of which have already been well-documented, and weighted against those of the Other are certainly not found wanting. I do desire that my wondering of this issue can be easily forgiven because, like the early Christians of Berea I weigh all things against scripture... and especially those things that beg my confidence because they merely profess Christ.

That said, there were some other things that Bush says in this interview, that sounded eerily similar to another leader, who was likewise greatly praised by Christian leaders and hailed by at least one as "a true brother in the Lord"...

"I think people attack me because they are fearful that I will then say that you're not equally as patriotic if you're not a religious person. I've never said that. I've never acted like that. I think that's just the way it is." (Huh?)
"...A general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith. From our point of view as representatives of the state, we need believing people."

"I fully understand that the job of the president is and must always be protecting the great right of people to worship or not worship as they see fit. That's what distinguishes us from the Taliban. The greatest freedom we have or one of the greatest freedoms is the right to worship the way you see fit."
"The... state has not closed a church, nor has it prevented the holding of a religious service, nor has it ever exercised any influence upon the form of a religious service. It has not exercised any pressure upon the doctrine nor on the profession of faith of any of the confessions."

"America is a remarkable place when it comes to religion and faith. We had people come to our rallies who were there specifically to say, 'I'm here to pray for you, let you know I'm praying for you.' And I was very grateful about that."
"Even today I am not ashamed to say that, overpowered by stormy enthusiasm, I fell down on my knees and thanked Heaven from an overflowing heart for granting me the good fortune of being permitted to live at this time."

"I don't see how you can be president at least from my perspective, how you can be president, without a relationship with the Lord."
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter... As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people."

"Whether they voted for you or not, there's a lot of values in this country, for which I'm real proud."
"In the state anyone is free to seek his blessedness after his own fashion."

"What we are going to do in the second term is to make sure that the grant money is available for faith communities to bid on, to make sure these faith-based offices are staffed and open. But the key thing is, is that we do have the capacity to allow faith programs to access enormous sums of social service money, which I think is important."
"It will be the Government's care to maintain honest cooperation between Church and State; the struggle against materialistic views and for a real national community is just as much in the interest of the German nation as in that of the welfare of our Christian faith."

The italicized text were quotes from George W. Bush in the Washington Times story.

The bold text were quotes from Adolf Hitler from numerous sources.

Parse this as you will.

Read More

So we got an Xbox for Christmas and I'm FINALLY "getting it" about why Halo is so frickin' awesome!!

But...

Okay, I'm not that far into the game as most people have been, who've probably won the thing and gone onto Halo 2 (which I can't wait to play but I'm a conservative videogamer: gotta finish one game before moving on to any sequels) so maybe this will make sense eventually. Right now it makes positively none to me.

I spent 2 hours last night stuck on that level where the mission is to lead your team aboard the Covenant ship via the "gravity lift" thingy. So far I'm still stuck. Gonna try it again late tonight but that ain't what's buggin' me.

WHY in the WORLD am I trying to take out an ALIEN ship that is named the "TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION"?!?!?

"Truth and Reconciliation"?! There'd better be some method to the Bungie guys' madness here, 'cuz that's about the most UN-THREATENING name for an evil alien enemy's warship as I've ever seen anywhere in fiction... and that's what's positively scaring me, for some weird reason. Say, wasn't "Truth and Reconciliation" the name of that committee that Bishop Desmond Tutu headed up in South Africa after apartheid ended there? PLEASE don't tell me that Bishop Tutu is onboard that ship trying to destroy humanity.

He ain't, right?

BTW, Halo is sooooo beautiful that sometimes Lisa has to come in and watch me play, just to take in all the amazing scenery and incredible sounds. This might be the most intoxicating game I've ever played.

That gives me an idea: maybe write a post about the best videogames I've ever played and why they're so good. Yeah, I'll work on that :-)

Read More

I've discovered the real meaning of life. Should it get posted here?

Somewhere between Charlotte and the state line the little car - its shiny exterior hardly speaking of the things that its owner had put it through in four-some years since purchase - tore along I-85, heading west into the night. It was unseasonably warm, and humid... not like what the storybook Christmas night is supposed to be at all. "We'll make up for that," the driver chuckled to himself. "Christmas of '85 was practically 80... then that winter storm a few weeks later brought the daytime high down to 10! Ahh well... more time to play inside I suppose."

The driver sipped from a bottle of Mountain Dew and listened as "Weird Al" Yankovic belted out a vintage holiday song over the car's stereo: "The Night Santa Went Crazy". "I should have found Weird Al's 'Christmas At Ground Zero'," thought the driver: "Lisa would have laughed her head off at THAT one!" To his right the passenger seat was reclined as far back as several large gift-wrapped boxes and other luggage would allow: lovely Lisa (who he always joked was his "Spousal Overunit") lay there asleep. She had been exhausted already after the day's activities, their third Christmas as husband and wife. And not for the first time did Chris wonder how it was that he, of all the guys in the world and after so many times in his life that "the one" had been found but only to be disappointed when she didn't meet what he really wanted in a wife... how it was he - and not some other guy - wound up with this so most beautiful of young lasses: her loveliness surpassed only by the purity of her heart.

It is said that there are fourteen words that can make a person love you for the rest of your life. But Lisa needed only one: "hello". "Yeah yeah I heard that said on a TV show years ago," Chris thought. "But she still had me after just 'hello'!"

Was she worth all the nonsense that he and "Weird" Ed had gone through during this past week to find an Xbox for a Christmas gift? Damned straight she was! Hell, he wound up with what might very well have been the last Xbox on sale in the state of North Carolina... can't get much more divine providence than that when you're set against all the hordes of last-minute shoppers like so many Visigoths coming over the hills to pillage Rome.

He gave her a loving glance. But not for too long. Lisa continued to slumber peacefully as her husband prayed that he could keep the car pegged at 110 MPH for a little while longer along this stretch of I-85... and prayed that Lisa would not soon wake up and make him lose his shot at breaking the record between home and her parents' house. And he let his mind wander, as it was apt to do, onto other things: some simple, some profound.

So it was that at some point before they had crossed into South Carolina that a thought crossed the mind of Christopher Knight... and without warning that most holy grail of philosophers and theologians resolved into crystal clarity in Reason's illumining glow.

For whatever reason, however exactly it happened (just a few moments before he had been thinking about that giant Star Wars LEGO set that Lisa had given him), Christopher had discovered, or understood... or perhaps was given, the meaning of life.

And though he was somewhat chagrined that the meaning of life had nothing whatsoever to do with either Monty Python or the number "42", he still was delighted to know that, yes, things DO make sense not just in this world but throughout this universe.

Why, this wasn't so much just the meaning of life... but it was the meaning of existence itself!

He made a mental note of it, took another glance at his wife, scanned ahead for whatever "smokies" he might discern in the dark, and continued to listen as Weird Al sang about how Santa Claus was dead, killed by a SWAT team that put a bullet through his head...

---

Not kidding. Think I might have really hit upon it a few weeks ago. No joke.

It's pretty cool, actually. But for it to be valid, for it to work, you must accept (A) that there is such a thing as God and that (B) He exists outside of the four dimensions that we can discern, outside of the universe itself even.

I've done some looking, but nobody's ever suggested this before, so far as I can tell. If they have then I'll make apology and retract the notion that's been on my mind the past while. But to the best of my knowledge, it's a pretty original thought.

I'm just wondering if I should share it though. I mean, mankind has been searching for the meaning of life since way back in the day. So if I wrote out my idea and if it's a really valid one and people think it works... well, wouldn't that put many of the world's philosophers out of business? That's one cottage industry America does still have left: you find philosophers on liberal arts college campuses, on blogs like this one, in barbershops especially the ones where they only sweep the floor every two or three days, face-down on the couch when one is smashed with hangover from the night before... darn near everywhere. Shouldn't I be a good patriot (and good overall humanitarian) and hold my tongue so that some of my countrymen can still go on with their livelihood? Or dare I share what I've come to realize, and risk taking that gamble in the hope that it might somehow lead to, as was appropriate with that night, "peace on Earth and goodwill toward men"?

Darned serious about thinking that I might really have it here, dudes. If/when it's posted it will not be something "humorous" or done as a gag, at all (which is more than can be said for this one idea I've had about quantum physics... but not now). It'll be done as a VERY considered and sober-minded theory... which is all it can be: the REAL "meaning of life" will ever be up for discussion and debate, as it should be. What I got isn't a scientific law, but a radical theory of ultimate purpose. But it's a pretty cool one 'cuz it touches on at least a bit of everything: theology, biology, cosmology, concepts of Einstein, the physics of matter and energy, quantum mechanics... and believe it or not, the existence of Good and Evil. I think they may have a connection to the physical world, in a very deep sense that I haven't even begun to dwell upon and doubt that I even really want to. Nonetheless, the things of this temporal realm and those beyond mortal comprehension are tied together, I'm coming to realize more and more, and we do have a place and a purpose within both.

This might turn some people off from what I would have to say, but it's perfectly consistent with the teachings of the Bible. Have thought about this a lot and can't find any obvious conflicts with my faith in Christ as best I can understand it. At this point some might think that it's drifting dangerously toward Gnosticism... but that's not really right to say, 'cuz this theory runs afoul of Gnostic thought in a lot of ways.

But to those that are turned off by that much, lemme entice ya with this: I'll wager good money that if you've ever been a fan of The Matrix that you might get a thrill out of reading this, when it's finally ready.

So... share it with y'all or not? It'll be looooooong, be warned of that now. But I'll do my best to make it a neat read :-)

Read More

The wisdom of a warped sage

"I once complained I had no scarf, until I met a man who had no neck."

Now go and meditate upon this, dear disciples.

Read More

You know that thing in the Bible about rendering unto God and Caesar?

Well, I've been wondering: I try my best to render unto God, but how am I supposed to render unto Caesar? Not to sound insensitive but ummm... I mean... the guy's dead, y'know.

And something else: Jesus taught us to "render unto Caesar those things that are Caesar's": He did not teach us to "render unto Caesar everything that Caesar claims is his after lusting for it". Which to the best of my knowledge none of the serious Caesars (forget Nero and Caligula) back then did that anyway.

Look, if Caesar is alive I'll gladly yield over what's owed him, as Jesus told me to do. But if I can't give Caesar his due, why the Hell should I give a cheap imitator with no real established authority over us a lot more than what's owed Caesar himself?

Read More

Amid the chaos and strife, a hero approaches with a glimmer of hope:

42

Read More

About next week's presidential inauguration...

Why must it cost $50 million to lay one's right hand atop a Bible and repeat an oath to uphold something that is going to be broken anyway?

For that kind of money, it darned well better be a Gutenberg he's swearing it on.

Read More

Quit shoving Valentine's Day down my throat when I'm still recovering from Christmas

You know how stores like Wal-Mart and Target and everyone else start putting their Valentine's Day stuff out the day after Christmas, and how on November 1st everything Christmas is already on full-bore display with all that candy that got marked half-off the only sign that Halloween has passed? And then when Valentine's is over, the Easter crap is already put up less than 24 hours later?

I hate that.

Life is too short without profit-mad corporate retailers speeding it up even more. I mean, is this how we divide the years of our lives: into Christmas shopping time and Halloween shopping time and Kwanzaa shopping time and Bastille Day shopping time and...? Shouldn't we be afforded a little space in-between holidays to have a normal life and able to reflect on the things about it that matter, WITHOUT being expected to buy buy buy stuff just to feel like we "belong" among the masses?

Therefore, here's a proposal I'd like to make: Congress should pass a law mandating that merchants can only start promoting a holiday within 3 weeks of that holiday. First violation will incur a fine up to, but not exceeding, $1 billion. Second violation will have the CEO of the company dragged out into the street and hung from the nearest telephone pole by his/her circular reproductive units with piano wire. Third violation will automatically enforce a fifty-year ban on being able to buy commercial time during the Super Bowl, on top of which the company will be required to pay market value for at least two but not more than five airings of the old Burger King "Herb" ad campaign during the first Super Bowl after conviction.

If all else fails, the rebellious retailer will be court-ordered to make as it's official spokesperson, at the judge's discretion, (a) Martha Stewart, (b) a Hindu untouchable named Shorty, or (c) those two guys who played Bulk and Skull on the original "Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers".

What say ye, fellow Americans?

Read More

Hell yes I AM TOO a serious Christian writer, dammit!!

It's occurred to me - on several occassions - that some people visiting this blog might go away feeling confused, and perhaps even upset or offended, at some of the language that I use here at times. And maybe that it runs wildly afoul of my claim to be a Christian and that must be something I need to bear in mind: my testimony before others, including my mannerisms and speech, should be a reflection of God's presence in my life so that others might see it. And if I'm not allowing God the fullest sovereignty or at least enough to keep from sounding like a Kid Rock video, wouldn't that make me out to be a hypocrite?

It really felt weighed on my chest to address this issue, and maybe point toward this post if it should come up again (as one person tonight did pass along a private mail about it). So here goes...

Yes, I do sometimes use what is considered to be "vulgarity", "swearing", "harsh language", whatever you want to term it. But hopefully you've noticed that I'm very, VERY selective in choosing which words to use and when to use them. They aren't used indiscriminantly by any measure: in last night's post mocking the Armstrong Williams "pundit-ola" scandal I started off with the word "Hell"... and not in the theological sense either. A lot of people and especially fellow Christians would find using "Hell" like that to be the hallmark of a wicked tongue. There's been no regret in my heart for running with it.

Words are but a pitiful vehicle through which we strive to convey thoughts and ideas and if "Hell" in one sense implies a careless "sure why not?" attitude and if there's no other word that has the same kind of "umph!" to it... well, I've no problem with using it. Yeah I could have used "heck" instead, but given the seriousness of Mr. Williams' actions, something more mature was called for, I felt. The same rule applies to whenever I use "damn": sometimes it's "damn" and others it's "darn" (and "darn" has been used the most by far of the two).

Look, I ain't stupid or inconsiderate here (I hope anyway). I grew up in the South, where yunguns are told to say "yessir" and "nomam" and to not use those words that come out of Daddy's mouth whenever he bangs his thumb with a hammer by accident. Even in this day and age, children are taught to have a healthy respect for the way they talk... or at least respect it if they want to keep their buttocks healthy lest a parent screams "I'm gunna ware you out!" And it's not just 'cuz of upbringing either: a person's language does say much about their thoughtfulness and maturity. What does it indicate of a guy when he uses the "f---" word at least every five syllables? I knew people like that in college though: can't help but wonder if their lingo ended up being a benefit or a liability if they decided to keep it after graduating. Yet even in that environment there's no excuse for it: your choice of language is a component of your character... and you can't lower the standard for that just because you're in a less formal setting.

That said, I do use "Hell" and "damn", if I've carefully judged that a writing situation calls for it. And on one occassion in this blog (and the only time in my life that I've ever done this with a published work) I employed the word "sh-t", but that was definitely the "once in a blue moon" time that (fortunately) is exceedingly rare: it was a situation that, I really had to convey a lot of sheer rage. Won't point to where it is, but if you ever find it you'll probably see why and that in its context, it really did seem quite appropos. The time I used "G-d-damn" well... that was the MOST I ever considered using a word and in the end I judged that it would be in the same spirit that Stanley Hauerwas uses it in (doubt I'll ever be that good though :-P) If it ever happens again, so help me I swear I'll eat my hat.

I'll NEVER make use of the "f---" word unless it's a direct quote of another person, and that's been done here too (when I gave an account of the time George W. Bush called me an "asshole" and had his private Brownshirts... ahh nevermind: go find it if you wish, and judge for yourself). But to use it facetiously or even to express the most intense anger and frustration... no, not going there. I've never done that and Lord willing never will. There are rules and boundaries in place and to write "f---" like that... it might limit me in revealing the fullest sense of anger on some things, but that's one line I can't bring myself to cross. It becomes particularly distatesful when you know the origin of the word and what it was used for.

But there's another reason why I choose to write this way sometimes. One that I choose not to indulge anyone with the details of, save those most intimate to me. They understand it perfectly. If they did not or were to object at it, it would put a great burden on my conscience to alter my style: that's how much I trust their judgment. They are the ones who know my heart best, and who or what it is most oriented toward. Though I do guard my speech, there is no obligation for me to tailor it so that it reflects something that my heart is not.

And isn't that the irony? Because I've known too many Christians that put on a show before the world about how "good" they are, especially how they want to sound so righteous in their language. But those same Christians are just as likely to be the ones most harboring malice in their hearts toward others. Their vocabulary is as sanitary as a Lysol factory... and yet when you close your eyes and not just "hear", but listen to their words and the thoughts they carry, you come to realize that it's all a show, to one degree or another. They coat the rancor of the heart with honey from the tongue to make it all the more delectable. They should instead devote their minds toward being as salt... but then, what good is salt, when it loses its saltiness?

I know more than enough Christians who you would never, ever hear such words come from their mouths as I've sometimes used here. Far more often than not, they are also the ones who relish any opportunity to let it be known that they despise "liberals", those of other religions than their own, people "over there" that "want to destroy our great country", other Christians that "don't worship like we do", and a myriad of other points of dissent. A few of them have even openly cheered at the news of their "enemies" dying in some far-off disaster, like the recent tsunami.

These are Christians that are far more concerned with how they appear and sound in this world, than how their hearts are devoted to the Kingdom of God. They try to satisfy all "the rules" but constantly ignore the greatest commandment: "Love one another".

There's a couple of names for people like that: "legalists" is one. I have to use "hypocrites" though... although no word I know of in the English language defines the wrath and frustration I feel toward them with. I'm almost tempted to call them utterly "degenerate", since their hearts seem incapable of showing that Christ's presence has enticed them to love even their enemies.

I'm not perfect. And I have written some things that were not pure of motive, at all: things that I've come to regret and wish that I could take back. But I can't compromise the honesty I try to have between God and myself regarding the condition of my heart, be it good or bad. No amount of "clean language" can hide or alter that condition in the slightest. And if my style of writing and language could be deemed a product of a lifetime of experiences that shaped me into who I am today... well, I couldn't change that overnight if I gave it my fullest effort. But I can rest in the assurance that Someone better than myself is in charge of editing my vocabulary, that I am still a manuscript from which He is working on making the final publication... and I'd rather defer to His expertise than my own.

To that end I choose to speak, and write, and definitely pray to God, as an extension of where my heart is in the fullest sincerity. By the way, people who know me best will tell you that my prayers are VERY informal, unorthodox, sometimes downright crude. But that's just coming from who God made me to be and it shouldn't be construed as an indication of what He's still making me into.

Besides, I figure that if you can't be honest when talking to Him, how can you possibly be honest with yourself?

I love God. I try to love all others be they friend or foe (and I confess to falling far short of meeting that goal... but I'm not ashamed to own up to that failure, either). The last thing I would want is to either hurt someone be it intentional or ignorant, or to be untrue about who I am before our Father in Heaven. And if I or anyone else strikes those of more legalistic traditions as being "uncouth", "immoral" or even "blasphemers" who couldn't possibly be their brother or sister in Christ... well, what is that to people like me, really? It's not they that I'm ultimately answerable to, but God. But at least some of us are willing to be so individual as to be compelled to admit that we are weak before God, instead of concealing our flaws and self-desires among those of others beneath the lovely veneer of factioned "faith".

Read More

Something wicked this way comes... again: Carnivàle second season begins tonight on HBO

When it comes to television, you're reading the words of a man who is only slightly more liberal than the Amish. Meaning: I have to know with conviction that whatever it is on the screen is not going to waste even a few hours of my life to watch. It better be enlightening enough that I'm not only willing, but desiring to invest my time toward viewing it. Heavy emphasis on "enlightening", too.

Suffice it to say, the number of things that have ever come on TV that I've so looked forward to watching as to have it marked on my mental calendar have been so few as to be countable on one hand. And the number of regular television series surpassing that bar have been far, FAR more scarce (yeah huge fan of The Simpsons but even they don't rate on my scale). There have only been two during my 30 years of living: Twin Peaks (yes, I will admit to being so offbeat a geek as to have LOVED that show!) and Babylon 5. Heck, Babylon 5 was worth an entire year or two of college education on top of the classes I was already taking. It was soooo good that it wasn't just something I took time out to watch every week, but some friends and I made it a Saturday night ritual to watch the new episodes at my apartment while eating Papa John's pizza. Man those were good days...

There hasn't been anything of that high a quality that's even remotely piqued my interest since then (the last episode of B5 aired in late 1998). Until this past year. It now looks like there's going to be three and possibly five television series that I'll have to start watching, if they're as good as people I trust have told me. The first is the new Battlestar Galactica: haven't even watched the miniseries that aired last year but Chad, my best friend since forever, had nothing but good ravings about how great it was. The folks from Great Britain who've seen episodes of the new series already have reported on Ain't It Cool News that, as one Brit put it, it is a "hexcellent" show. After reading enough about it online, I'm committing myself to finding a DVD of the miniseries and catching up before the main show cranks up.

There's also something called Lost, which I haven't seen a single episode of either but Spousal Overunit's Terrific Mother claims it's "a really good show!" When Spousal Overunit's Terrific Mother says something is worth checking out, I listen. Looks like I was fooled early on and wrote this off as something predictable – about a group of plane crash survivors – but it's not, apparently. Someone told me that there's literally hundreds of theories about what is going on with this show's plot and most of 'em have to do with weird mystical stuff the likes of which prolly haven't been seen since Caine bench-pressed the entire Earth with his mind on Kung Fu: The Legend Continues. I caught maybe three minutes of Lost when we were in Georgia for Christmas the other week and noticed that it had Terry O'Quinn (glad to see that after Millennium his talents are getting appreciated again) and Dominic Monaghan, who played a midget in some little art-house film called The Lord of the Rings. But I guess a show that by all accounts has polar bears running loose on a tropical island should be looked into no matter how good the cast is, right? Promise, I'll try to dig it and post some thoughts.

Two of the shows haven't even begun airing at all yet, but I'm already there, maaaaan: the revived Doctor Who, which the BBC starts running this spring (in case you haven't heard: the Daleks will be returning!) and the untitled Star Wars series set for 2006... 'nuff said.

But there's only ONE television series on the air right now that has so hooked me as to not dare miss any new episodes, if I can help it. After more than a year since the last original chapter, the Carnivàle comes back to town with its second season tonight at 9 PM EST on HBO.

Geez, where to begin. Well it must be said from the getgo: THIS IS THE COOLEST TEEVEE SHOW IN ALL CREATION RIGHT NOW!! And what first made my ears stand up was when the teaser commercials began in fall of 2003 and they really played up Carnivàle's setting: 1932, at the height of the Great Depression. With most of the story taking place in the shriveled wastes of the Dust Bowl. Now, any TV show can have the classic struggle between Good and Evil... that's done all the time one way or another. But to kick it all off with a bulldozer threatening to demolish a foreclosed shanty a'la The Grapes of Wrath? Now, THAT takes brass ones! As a student of history with a particular interest in the era, I've found Carnivàle to be both remarkably accurate with its setting and utterly refreshing in how it draws from the VERY-scarcely tapped mythos of that time. Suddenly the Great Depression seems less a time of sorrow than it was of mystery. But I'll let the opening prologue from the very first episode speak for it:

"Before the beginning, after the great war between heaven and hell, God created the earth and gave dominion over it to the crafty ape he called man. And to each generation was born a creature of light and a creature of darkness. And great armies clashed by night in the ancient war between good and evil. There was magic then, nobility, and unimaginable cruelty. And so it was until the day that a false sun exploded over Trinity. And man forever traded away wonder for reason."

Those words are spoken by Samson, played by Michael J. Anderson... you know, the "dancing dwarf" from Twin Peaks and anytime he shows up, you know yer in for something else. He's but one part of another reason why Carnivàle so arrests your senses: the cast. You got Anderson, Nick Stahl (played John Connor in Terminator 3, Clancy Brown (yup, the Kurgan himself), Adrienne Barbeau ("That's Maggie: Brain's squeeze."), Amy Madigan (who went from sweet lil' homebody in Field of Dreams to apostlette of Hell), Ralph Waite ("Good night John-Boy!") and more than time really allows me to write about at the moment (got church in a little while :-).

This show is extremely well-paced. Some thought the first season was slow and plodding. I found it to be patient and considerate: you get a sense that these were real people (though some of them are bearded ladies and human lizards) with real histories behind them. There's definitely a sense that there's going to be a massive conflagration between Heaven and Hell... but there's no rushing to that just yet and there doesn't need to be. But when it does happen it's going to hurt the longtime fans of the show quite a bit, because they'll already have been made to understand and empathize with these characters and if some of them get hurt or worse and we hurt with them... well, that is effective storytelling, my friends. The first season was where we got to see all the pieces and how they got placed on the board: season two should be when the real opening moves are made.

Which should shed light on some (hopefully not all though, at least this season) of the many mysteries of Carnivàle. Not the least of which has been the biggest: who – or what – is Management? Season One's finale ended with Ben Hawkins (Stahl's character) standing over the dead body of mentalist Lodz in Management's trailer, confronting whoever it is behind the curtain. According to one "Quint" at Ain't It Cool News, the identity of Management will be revealed tonight... although whether we actually see Management itself might not happen yet. Lots of other mysteries, but I'll let you discover what those are yourself.

An intriguing setting, wonderful actors, an immersive storyline, and in my opinion what has been VERY respectful treatment of the Christian religion... well, for all those reasons and more, that's why I plan to park my keister in front of the teevee tonight and watch Carnivàle's season two opener. Check it out if you got HBO. Beg friends who have HBO to let you watch it at their place if you don't (but remember to wipe your feet before going in and onto their nice clean carpet!).

Read More

So TNT is running The Perfect Storm right now and I'm wondering...

...this movie about the Andrea Gail and the 1991 noreaster is a wonderful tribute to, not only the crew of the ship but to all those who have worked the seas to make a living for generations.

Somebody should now make a movie about the Edmund Fitzgerald.

It'll be 30 years this coming fall since it happened, arguably the most famous shipwreck of the last half-century. I've spoken with people who were college students in Michigan at the time: they remembered going to the beach of Lake Superior and crying. There's a whole different kind of kinship and community along those shores, and something about the Edmund Fitzgerald would be a beautiful way to honor that... and her crew.

The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
Of the big lake they call Gitche Gumee
The lake, it is said, never gives up her dead
When the skies of November turn gloomy...

Always believed that the story of the "Fitz" and her legendary colorful crewmembers needed to be done as a movie. I'd give just about anything to be a part of that, if it were to be done.

(Besides, doncha think that Gordon Lightfoot deserves to record a major motion picture soundtrack after all these years? :-)

Read More

Yet another thought on contemporary Christianity

Doesn't it seem like too many Christians nowadays have based their faith on the Rapture instead of basing it in Christ?

Read More

A business proposal to the Bush Administration from its friends at The Knight Shift

Hell, I'd be a fool to pass up an opportunity like this...

January 8, 2005 Dear White House staff, In light of the recent discovery of new market areas, I wish to forward this proposal to you: that I will post anything you want to appear in this blog and pledge to bring the full weight of my journalistic presence toward promoting any issue that you wish to persuade the American people on, provided you can find the generosity to also donate to this media outlet the standard advertising fee of $250,000. Yes, I admit to having a marginally smaller audience than Armstrong Williams. But as fellow Christians I call upon you to practice the "Seed Faith" that Oral Roberts and that weird-haired lady on the Trinity Broadcast Network espouse: give this blog a lot of money and trust that it will lead to The Knight Shift becoming a major press powerhouse. I will patiently await your response at theknightshift@gmail.com. Until then I am most sincerely, yours truly, Rupert Christopher Farnsworth-Finster Mildred Higgenbottoms Knight III, Esq. Editor/Publisher/Proprietor, The Knight Shift

Read More