Time for a new metaphor??

Now that Obama's in (was there ever any doubt?) there are a few commentators - the conservative types - who are saying stuff like - "Well, he can't keep his promises on taxes, especially to the richer types - that would be disastrous!" One of those commentators is Michael Campbell - big time financial guru here in BC - who can't even pronounce Obama's name correctly. Imagine: O-BAM-AH. If Canadians keep this pronunciation up, I will retaliate with CAH-NAY-DAH!
Anywhoo... I was thinking about Obama stating that we need to get rid of this old ecomomic model of "trickle down" theory. This, I believe, was started by Reagan (who Obama has thoroughly studied and I believe admires in some ways -- wait : a president who STUDIES something, as in, READING???? What a difference!!) This 'trickle down' theory is a tired metaphor. If you try to hold water, some of it always trickles down. The problem is, there is no trickling....the economy has nothing.
A better metaphor may be of a glutton. The glutton is at the table, slamming down all the food he can get his hands on. As he eats quickly, food flies off the table: We are just getting the crumbs. This displays the need for a different system: We need to take some of that food off of the table and actually give it to the poor souls on the floor. The trouble with 'trickle down' is that it doesn't take into account human greed and the creativity of the human to discover ways (loopholes) for keeping the most food on the table.
This is what we've had and the system is collapsing due to human greed. The gluttons at the top are crying over the loss of food. That's all there is to it.

USA: Obama is the only choice left...

I'm addicted to watching CNN election coverage. It's gotta be the most entertaining TV at the moment. I love all the talk of polls and 'close call' -- it's hilarious!! I have a hard time believing that there could be any kind of 'close call' - this is the choice, America: More of the same, or the chance for something different. I voted already - for Obama, of course - and my reasoning has really not much to do with all the complicated platforms and rhetoric. It's simply the point of view that the Republicans had their guy in the White House. He blew it: BIG TIME! It's time to give the other guys a chance, no matter what the platforms are. Some people are talking the election like it's about the salvation of the country or something. Well, it's not. You - individual people - are what really matters. The president won't change who YOU are, so go do something about improving the country. Let the party not in power have a chance and go out and give a poor family a nice Christmas.

Some other random thoughts concerning the US election in no particular order:

• The US looks 'bad' in the eyes of the world. John McCain's mere presence in the White House will do nothing but confirm to the world that the US is REALLY 'bad'. So think on that.


• The election of Barak Obama will potentially enact a profound change in the American psyche. Suddenly, people will realize that people from other races are actually, well, people. I can't really put my finger on it, but we can't afford to have another old white man in the White House at this time....


• Palin - Great punchline and she'll be nothing but a joke as VP. We will yearn for Quayle if she gets in.


• This whole 'test' idea: The new president will be tested, I would think, by some idiot fundamentalist somewhere on the planet. Biden was right. McCain - you've never been President, so you can't say you've been tested. You're on the same page as Obama in that regard.


• Abortion: I hate abortion. I'm not thrilled with most 'pro-choice' rhetoric, but I know Obama gave the most realistic answer on abortion ever during the conversation he had with Rick Warren. No, he wasn't 'decisive': it's called thinking carefully. If you want 'decisive': we had that for the past 8 years, ya know!! I want a President who listens and thinks carefully and weighs all the options. Abortion is an issue that will require a lot of tact and insight. John McCain's answer was decisive and textbook 'pro-life',i.e., he's gonna totally ignore the issue when he's in the White House.


• You know why Colin Powell supported Obama, besides that Obama is the only choice. Bush stabbed him in the back and pushed him out of the White House. I'd be shocked if Powell supported McCain. THAT would be news! And please notice other Republicans are supporting Obama. What does that tell you?


• Advice to Obama: Hilary Clinton for Secretary of State. Think about it - not that you haven't already!

Well, that's the end of my ramblings. I like rambling on the blog - keeps me sane since I have to be so organized in writing for graduate school. I bet you can tell that's quite a challenge for me!!

We're Better Off...

Ok, it's official. Canada is also going to have a federal election in the fall. However, there isn't much of a choice and everyone knows it. This is even obvious in the Conservative slogan (I'm not making this up): We're better off with Harper. I must say I find it slightly...dismissive? Is that the word for it? When do we say "we're better off" in every day life? Well, we have two ways to go somewhere: "We're better off going this way because the other way has more potholes or traffic lights or is more congested this time of day, etc." It's almost saying "You don't really have a choice and we know it..." Why would Stephen Harper call an election? Well, he's hoping for majority government, of course. It must be mind bogglingly dull to write about the Canadian election this season. There really is no other choice. The other guy, Stefan Dion, is, well, nothing. He's a nothing. A wisp of smoke on the political scene. He couldn't challenge a five year old for a spot at the play dough table. It's the complete opposite of the US election. We're talking celebrities. Obama has rhetorical flair - he's not easily dismissed or put aside. McCain has a solid story rooting him in history. They are, like 'em or hate 'em, characters. I'd read books about either one of them. Now, we have the Canadian side. I can barely read the tiniest article about either Harper or Dion without needing a caffeine jolt of some kind. If Obama was in the same room as I was - I would strain to see him....perhaps try to shake his hand. If Dion was in the room, well, I wouldn't even know it. I could walk right up to a potential prime ministerial canidate and, squinting my eyes and tilting my head, I would ask, "Hey, I know you from somewhere....Where you ever a guest star on Star Trek?"

The Dark Knight: There's a Metaphor....somehow..

Ok, I've been totally not posting. What a whirlwind! I'm taking a leave of absence from teaching in order to work on my Masters degree and just getting my classroom packed up, doing report cards, helping Ruth with getting a full-time job AND finishing the paper that I needed to write since Fall (It was cool - don't know if it was written well or not, but it was on the idea of Monsters and forgiveness...)

Anywhoo, I'm just putting this out there: The Dark Knight is an incredible movie that has got to be a metaphor for something....something modern.

I should be profound, but I kinda get all the profundity wrung out of me by contemplating JRR Tolkien and the Inklings ~click on the word if you don't know what it means...

The Joker is an incredible villian in this movie. He is Chaos personified - Anarchy without the subtle wit. He has not interest in money or power - just destruction. Why? It seems to be more than he 'just likes to blow things up'. I definitely want to see this movie a few times (own it on DVD, too). Everything in this movie seems to be a Statement About Something. I know there's a connectiong with the Inklings - Dare I bring up movies in yet another grad paper????

Subtle Fundamentalism

I spent a lot of time thinking about Fundamentalism over spring break - Yes, I think it's fun...why do you ask? - Anyway, I wrote a short summary paper about fundamentalism. Looking at the current so-called "war on terror", Craig Unger points out that this war is really a war about religious fundamentalism (both Islamic and Christian) versus the modern world. Terry Eagleton points out that fundamentalism is a "textual affair" - it 'worships' dead text. The very act of preaching should negate fundamentalism, because as soon as we open our mouth - we are interpreting in a new way. Paul Ricoeur shuddered at the very idea of a "sacred text" - because Christianity is supposed to be about worshipping Christ, not the very text that speaks of him.

Fundamentalism is often characterized as obvious - thundering, smashing its way through society. However, I'm beginning to realize how subtle it can be. I stumbled upon this quote in a magazine for Christian school teachers:

"If Christianity is truth, then Christian education is the only true education and therefore the only practical education. There is no education, no truth - nothing - without God, the eternal author of reality."

(quote is attributed to David Claerbaut, Faith and Learning on the Edge)

Oh, really? It seems like a nice comfortable, perhaps pithy kind of quote, but I will contend that it is an example of how subtle fundamentalism will be.

Let's unpack it a bit by looking first at its conclusion: no education without God, no truth without God... Right away, I begin thinking that the rain falls on the evil and the good, doesn't it? If this is true, then isn't this quote a slap in the face of any kind of public education. Does this mean that Muslims could never make an important discovery or speak truth - ever? Obviously, that cannot be true. Not every invention, every innovation, every insight on this planet was initiated and completed by a Christian.

Wait a second....let's back up to the If...then statement...

If Christianity is truth.....

Interesting assumption. The obvious question: Is Christianity truth? Well, I'm not so sure about that. What is Christianity? A belief system...worldview...an interpretation. Christianity is practiced by those who claim to be following Jesus. Christianity look, sounds, and is experienced differently by different people in different cultures in different ways. How can the practice of following Christ by truth?

Christ never said this. He did say: "I am the way, the truth and the life..." Perhaps we are proceeding from false assumptions or am I being fundamentalistic in my interpretation? *shudder* Well, let's put that aside for now....

So Christ/God is TRUTH. So it must follow that truth is embedded in Creation and all people, who are created in God's image, will respond to it in different ways. Therefore, an atheist may discover a deep, hidden truth that, yes, even Christians can benefit from.

Is Christian education the only 'true' education....nope, can't be. Well, at least it can't be based on this line of reasoning. Sometimes in the intense competitiveness between schools, we need to 'sell' the Christian school to make it 'look' better. Perhaps this kind of thinking is a result of that - for fundamentalism is, ultimately, a fear of non-being, of death, according to Eagleton. Some schools are just not able to compete against the government funding of public schools and are fighting for survival. Fundamentalism, ultimately, never works, though. Clearer thinking is needed.

Sign of the Times???

I'm currently struggling with writing assignments in grad school as well as trying to write report cards, so therefore I suddenly had an urge to post something here. I wonder why....

Anyway, I was working on report cards, when I noticed one of these "smart tags" appear under the word "ART" on the student checklist. These are little letter i's that appear under names and things in Microsoft Word. Apparently, they are supposed to be useful, but they are basically distracting to me and I see them and end up posting here or doing some other thing that keeps me from continuing to work.

Now, why would an "i with a circle" - which is how I think of them - appear under ART? Would it give me a link to the Metropolitan Museum of ART, the Louvre, The Philadelphia Museum of Art, etc???

Nope.

It gives me links to stock quotes and financial exchanges. It looks like a bunch of these companies say ART in their titles!

I'm not so desparate (yet) to see what these companies are really about. Although you could ask me in a week closer to the report card due date and see if I have.

Is this the sign of the times? Art is reduced to stock quotes???

Perhaps there's a paper for grad school in this somewhere, after all....

Connections

I started watching The Gospel of John and I saw the part where Jesus was calling his disciples. Now, this is done by the Visual Bible People, so the only dialogue is the actual Bible. They do, however, show visually some different things that one doesn't always have pictured in one's head. I always pictured Jesus calling his disciples, you know, at random or something. Like they didn't already know each other. In this version, it shows the different disciples connecting and getting others that they knew already. I never realized it, but it is in the text, itself:

(from John 1, NIV)
35The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. 36When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, "Look, the Lamb of God!"
37When the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. 38Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, "What do you want?"
They said, "Rabbi" (which means Teacher), "where are you staying?"

39"Come," he replied, "and you will see."
So they went and saw where he was staying, and spent that day with him. It was about the tenth hour.

40Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, was one of the two who heard what John had said and who had followed Jesus. 41The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, "We have found the Messiah" (that is, the Christ). 42And he brought him to Jesus.
Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas" (which, when translated, is Peter[j]).
43The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, he said to him, "Follow me."
44Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. 45Philip found Nathanael and told him, "We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."

46"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Nathanael asked.
"Come and see," said Philip.

47When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, "Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false."

48"How do you know me?" Nathanael asked.
Jesus answered, "I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you."

49Then Nathanael declared, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel."

50Jesus said, "You believe[k] because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that." 51He then added, "I tell you[l] the truth, you[m] shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."

I just thought it was neat how one goes to the other and brings that person that they already knew to Jesus. Maybe this is a pattern that many modern day Christian kind of don't realize. They just sit and wait for Jesus to do all the calling, when we're supposed to run around telling others. Hmmmmmm......