Average Dumby

Not only are blogs extreme on the political ends, but in reporting new studies or findings, they tend to be extreme as well. Flashy news reports tend to be a bit ambiguous or not well supported; AMERICAblog.com posted new research material about the effect that cell phones have on us. Although there have been many studies before, and the negative neurological impact of cell phones can be confusing, there is new evidence that it is necessary to leave them alone at night if you want to sleep. Who would have thought?

There is talk (hehe) that radiation from cell phones delays and reduces sleep, causing headaches and confusion. The research, which was sponsored by the mobile phone companies themselves (how thoughtful!...) shows that using handsets before bed increases the time it takes people to reach that stage of REM sleep, and people stay in that stage longer. This therefore interferes with the body’s ability “to repair damage suffered during the day.” The cell phone had especially alarming effects for children and teenagers because they use there cell phones late ant night when they should be sleeping. Due to the failure of getting enough sleep, younger people experience mood and personality changes, ADHD-like symptoms, depression lack of concentration, and poor academic performance.

I am not sure what you are feeling, but personally this article was offensive. No kidding that if you stay up later talking on the phone, you are going to be more alert, and therefore not fall asleep as easily. If you are awake longer in your bed and talking when you should be sleeping, you are not going to get enough sleep. It’s not the cell phone radiation that is making us more tired; it’s our poor sleep habits that are limiting us. If this article was addressing the average person…I am frightened by the perceived intelligence of the ‘average.’

Chuch Norris Nonsense

It is quite humorous to use one of the hundred’s of ‘Chuck Norris’ insults from over the years, but what about being insulted by Chuck Norris himself? Maybe not so fun…

Well, the new post on AMERICAblog.com commented on Mike Huckabee’s well known supporter, Chuck Norris, voiced his opinion this Sunday that Sen. John McCain is too old to handle the pressures of being president. He did not want to support McCain because he was afraid that his VP would eventually take over his job of Presidency, and Norris would rather vote for a president that he could imagine holding office for both terms.

Many people were adamant about Norris saying that, believing that McCain should be given a chance. Norris points out that a younger president would bring youth and vision and communication skills that would benefit our country. It is important to have someone in office that is very accustomed to new technology and to more modernized methods of international relations. Age is a debilitating factor, just as a debilitating disease. We want someone healthy and vibrant to represent our nation.

Yet, a president with such age and experience would also bring wisdom and a firm set or moral absolutes that our country would firmly be grounded in. Our nation has been gradually slipping away from its rich Christian foundations and post modernism has diluted our moral system. Maybe having someone older, wise, and old fashioned would benefit our nation more than someone young and inexperienced?

The Horrors of Barbers and N. Ireland

Wallis insightfully compares the new movie, Sweeney Todd, starring Johnny Depp, the violent history of Northern Ireland, and our current political campaign. The movie stars Depp as a 19^th century barber who seeks revenge for the loss off his wife and daughter through his customers, and the move makes the point that “Sweeney’s spiral of violence never ends.” Wallis had also previously attending a conference dealing with methods of helping the people of Northern Ireland to address their violent history. Two things were made clear at this meeting: first, that there is an unimaginable depth of genuine sorrow in that society, and the common lack of ability to empathize with the pain of others in the community (seeing our pain as “exclusive”).

Wallis argues that the traits that appear in situations of “deep horror” also appear in more benign contexts such as political campaigning. Acknowledging that politics is though and it is easy to become emotionally involved, he recognizes that even Clinton is human and needs to be treated as so. Just as in class how we were talking about the family dog and a natural disaster in China, a reporter in Newsweek tried to slight Clinton by saying how disgraceful it was that she cried about her campaign but did not shed tears about Hurricane Katrina. As horrible as the tragedy was, I am sure many American’s did not cry about Hurricane Katrina, but that they have cried as a result of much more miniscule dilemmas than a campaign.

Wallis goes on to explain that a cynical world breeds the opposite of compassion, and when there is no compassion, killing can begin. As killing seems extreme for us Americans in our democratic elections, our political campaigns are often “reduced to mocking [and] dehumanizing” and who knows just how far off killing can be. It is a gradual slope that is becoming steeper and steeper.

MLKJ, Obama, Clinton... Which One Does Not Belong With the Others?

I came upon link regarding how Christians should view Israel and thought it was appropriate considering our discussion in class:

http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/2008/01/how-should-christians-relate-t.html

Wallis once again, in his article “MLK and LBJ: Movements and Politicians,” stresses the importance of social change preceding political change He comments on how words between Obama and Clinton exploded into racial conflict after comments about MLK Jr. and President Lyndon Johnson were made. Race is not the proper argument that should be used in order to make political gains. Wallis demonstrates that the “great practitioners of change,” such as MLK Jr. and Ghandi knew that replacing politicians does not bring about societal change. It is necessary to “change the wind, transform the debate, recast the discussion, [and] alter the context in which political decision are being made” in order to change the outcomes.

Wallis discuses the story of the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965 whereby President Johnson told MLK Jr. that such a bill would not be politically possible at the time. MLK Jr. was not satisfied with that answer so the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and King started to organize dissidence in Selma, Alabama. This ultimately led to the Montgomery march, an event the whole nation watched. After that month it took only five months to pas the new voting rights act. Yes, Wallis admits, that Johnson was responsible for the response of the march, but it was King, who “painted a vivid picture for the world to see that changed the winds of public opinion.”

This historical account supports the argument of Wallis and the previous posts I have made regarding the importance of social change preceding political change. There will always be restrictions that the candidates or presidents face, but it is the public opinion and mass efforts of citizens that truly get things done.

Constricting for Catholics

AMERICAblog.com is "liveblogging" the Democratic debate and Joe Subday writes, "By and large, I tend to agree with the Democratic candidates and want one of them to be President."

I thought this fit perfectly with what we discussed in class earlier today. People are going to speak to issues that concern them and focus on the good of their own side. The statement that Subday writes is anything but thought provoking or interesting. Writing on a liberal blog, I would automatically assume that he would agree with the Democratic candidates, considering they represent what he stands for. The debate is only between Democratic candidates anyways, so of course he agrees with something that is being said! "By and large..." ...? hmmm...


In a previous post, the author discusses how Huckabee has plans to change the constitution in order to abolish gay marriage and abortion in order that it better reflects the "word of the living God." The author argues, "So, would that include adding anti-Catholic language to the Constitution? I mean, clearly Huckabee's version of Christianity includes none of the rest of us Christians..."


Not that I am taking a gay marriage or abortion stand right now, but this country was based on Christian principles. So, implementing Biblical morals in the Constitution does not seem too out of line. The author, a Catholic, believes that his views are not being considered by Huckabee. Again, not that I am agreeing with ratifying the constitution, but do Catholics really believe that if Christ was in the legislature that he would sign off on a bill permitting gay marriage and abortion? If so, what would his grounds be?

Pronoun Panic

Johnson, a Roman Catholic sister in the Congregation of St. Joseph was interviewed in a post of God’s Politics about the image of God being male or female. She states that new seekers are not satisfied with “stale images of God” used today. She states that the symbol of God functions in certain ways; “The male symbol of God functions to privilege a certain way of male rule in the world and to undercut women's spiritual power, women's own sense of themselves as made in the image of God.” She argues that women are therefore forced to “abstract ourselves” from our bodies in order to see ourselves in the image of God, which continually has consequences for women’s spirituality. She argues that the Vatican denied the proposal for nonsexist language in 1992 because there is fear that it will empower women to a social and political movement which will challenge the church structure.

A few semesters ago I had a religion professor who used male and female connotations when referring to God, and asked for the same of everyone in the class. He said that he attended a church where they only referred to God as a woman, and it was extremely hard for him to concentrate and imagine God in those terms. He told our class that he felt convicted because that must be what women feel like when they attend most churches that only refer to a male God.

I am not sure if I completely agree with Johnson or my previous professor. I don’t believe that I have to disregard my femininity in order to view myself in the image of God. I am God’s child, and he is my father. The leadership and strength that usually accompany male stereotypes greatly affect my view of my Savior, and I am not sure if referring to God as “she” would have that same effect. I have grown up considering Christ my father and bridegroom, and I believe that changing what I have known my entire life would be beneficial to my relationship with Christ. But worrying so much about God’s gender detracts from his power and his might. We should not be concerned with pronouns but rather praise!

Identity Crisis

AMERCIAblog.com discusses this morning how the rising of gasoline prices obviously affect the middle and lower income families, and that the levels of satisfaction by the public with the national condition of the economy has not been as low since 1992. The author points out that Americans are still going to buy gas even if the prices continue to rise, for they are not nearly high enough for that to change. Yet, what is happening is that consumers are buying less of most other goods. There has been the first decline of significant personal spending since 1991.

Not only are high gas prices making driving more and more inconvenient, but it is significantly hurting other areas of the economy! I never realized the long lasting effects that it had. Yes, people are more likely to stay nearby on a Friday night or something because they don’t want to drive far, but they are also resisting that tempting sale at AE or what not because they know they have a tank to fill. For as much as many hates Bush and what he has done to our economy, it will be interesting to see the effect that the new president will have. It almost seems at times, as sad as it is, that consumerism is America’s identity. Hopefully we can recover ourselves! J