What’s Good for America

In the news yesterday, June 26, 2006, was a story about the Supreme Court agreeing to hear arguments on whether the federal government must (or even has the authority to) regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant.  This case could have broad implications for utilities, auto manufacturers and other industries nationwide.   So it’s important, folks.  But I don’t anticipate the Court ruling in favor of the 12 states, 13 environmental groups, two cities and American Samoa that are bringing suit against the nation’s government. Why? Well, it wouldn’t be good for business.  That’s why.  See the FULL STORY in the Seattle Times.

Charles E. Wilson, who eventually became Secretary of Defense during the Eisenhower years, is often misquoted as having said during Senate confirmation hearings, “What’s good for General Motors is good for the country.”  What he really said, when asked if as secretary of defense he could make a decision adverse to the interests of General Motors, was, “Yes.”  But he added words to the effect that he could not conceive of such a situation, “… because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa.”  You see, Wilson had been CEO of General Motors and, at the time of his nomination, he still owned 2.5 million dollars in General Motors stock – a tidy sum back then.  Notwithstanding, he was eventually approved for the post.  You can read more about Wilson, if you’re interested, in this Department of Defense biography.   Hmmm… I wonder how much Mr. Cheney still owns of Halliburton?… another posting another time perhaps.

You may or may not think that this little tidbit of U.S. history is interesting.  But whether you do or not, you might well ask, why should we care?  Why should you bring it up in a posting about the Supreme Court and the environment?  Well, because the myth about what Wilson said seems to be more true about our country than what he really said.  People actually do believe what they think he said is true… if that makes any sense.  Personally, I think it’s even more true today, under the Bush/Cheney administration and a Republican-controlled Congress, than it ever has been.  But, hey… that’s just me talking.  Substitute the word, “business,” for the words, “General Motors” (back then, circa 1953, the two were virtually synonymous) and you’ve pretty much defined the motivation behind everything that Washington does, everything except getting reelected that is.  Didn’t Will Rogers say, “A fool and his money are soon elected?”

Smart man that Will Rogers, but he wasn’t the only American that could sort the wheat from the chaff.  President Eisenhower could too, and he was a Republican!  In fact, most of us can clearly see that what is good for America is not always what is best for America.  Let’s all hope the Supreme Court still can too.  But, hey!  They at least agreed to hear the case.

To post a comment, click on the tiny COMMENTS word below.

Published in: on June 27, 2006 at 4:01 pm  Leave a Comment  

Wouldn’t It Be Wonderful?

“I’m not an enthusiast for dynastic wealth, particularly when 6 billion others have much poorer hands than we do in life.”  This was reportedly said by Mr. Warren Buffett today at the New York Public Library, where he was appearing with Bill and Melinda Gates, the only Americans richer than he is. You can read the whole story in the Business section of the New York Times FULL STORY.

At a time when many in Congress are trying to do away with the Estate, AKA “death” Tax permanently, some of the wealthiest among us are demonstrating a much better model of behavior.   At least I think so.   But wouldn’t it be wonderful to be able to give most of your wealth away and still have more than you could ever possibly need?  See this FactCheck article on distortions put out by the Free Enterprise Foundation, a lobby group spending 4.1 million dollars this year in an attempt to do away with the Estate Tax for good FULL STORY.

In truth, the Estate Tax affects fewer than one percent of Americans.  So, surely a government that represents ALL the people won’t succumb to the will of so few.  Hmmm… or would it?  What’s in your wallet?

Post your comment by clicking on the COMMENTS word below.

Published in: on June 27, 2006 at 3:01 am  Comments (2)  

Please Don’t Call Me a Liberal, But…

“Sadly, it’s become the divine distraction. Here we are bogged down in a colonial war, spending beyond our means, leaving our children a colossal debt, paving over our farmland, allowing health care to be both expensive and inefficient, facing a shortage of affordable housing, and addicted to oil that is making us more and more dependent on Islamic countries. And the party in power is obsessed with gay marriage?”–Journalist Bill Moyers, in an interview with The Dallas Morning News, commenting on the relevancy of faith and reason to contemporary American politics.
FULL STORY

Post your comment by clicking on the tiny COMMENTS word below.

Published in: on June 26, 2006 at 5:28 pm  Leave a Comment  

Why We Worship

I’ve been hearing some of my fellow parishioners say lately that they just aren’t having their worship needs met.  Others are refusing to say anything, but I can tell from their hangdog expressions in the narthex following worship that something is amiss.  Could it be that they aren’t happy with recent changes that have taken place?  I’ll try to explain…

The United Methodist Church employs a concept called itineracy in making pastoral appointments.  This means that, to serve as an ordained minister in the church, one must agree to serve where one’s bishop decides.  In theory, appointments are made according to the greater need of one’s jurisdiction.  And needs change as demographics change.

Recently, our little church in a suburban city of the greater Dallas/Ft. Worth metroplex, lost our pastor of four years to a “greater” need elsewhere in the jurisdiction.  For weeks after the move was announced but before his last sermon, there was great sadness, even anger among us.  We had grown to love him, his wife, and their two adopted, mixed-race children.  He was a gifted preacher, an excellent administrator, and an inspired, tireless, leader.  He did all he knew how to do… all that God gave him to do.  However, our new pastor, I judge, owing to demographic changes in our community over recent years, is more “ethnically appropriate” for our church.  She’s black.

Our little church had long prided itself for being, in the Methodist tradition, an open and accepting congregation, but even more so than most; we intentionally promoted diversity and celebrated a multi-ethnic identity.  Unfortunately, it isn’t everyone that can comfortably wear this identity.  Founding members were leaving as the church became more diverse.  People were not pledging or honoring pledges once made. The same tired ten percent were doing eighty percent of the work.  In short, the church was slowly dying.  The pastor and lay leadership tried everything.  We even hired an expensive, well-known church consultant to come evaluate things and to advise us on what we needed to do to turn things around.  He had some good ideas.  But the bishop, it seems, had a better one.  And, after just two Sundays with our new pastor, it’s already apparent to many of us that the majority is quickly becoming the minority.  Things have indeed turned around, but in a way and so rapidly that few of us anticipated.

Despite our new pastor’s pledge to honor who we are as a multi-ethnic church and to not make changes too rapidly, change is of what what we are all most aware.  Things now are less contemporary, more traditional in a way, but also more charismatic.  Some, I fear, are already beginning to look elsewhere to have their needs met.  It’s called “white flight,” folks.  But, I ask you, is having our needs met what worship is all about?  I think not.

Although I have surely enjoyed worship on many occasions, the purpose of worship is not for our entertainment, or even for our enjoyment.  Its purpose is to glorify, honor, praise, exalt, and please God in return for His having given us His Son, our salvation.

The following has been liberally borrowed from the On-line Interactive Church (http://www.bible.ca/interactive/worship-1-purpose.htm).

“The nature of the worship God demands is the prostration of our souls before Him in humble and contrite submission. James 4:6, 10 tells us, ‘God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and He will lift you up’ (Interactive Church).”

Our worship of God should, therefore, be a very humble and reverent action.  “Jesus says in John 4:23-24, ‘But the hour is coming, and now is, when true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father is seeking such to worship Him.’  God is a spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. It doesn’t say that we can worship God anyway we want, but we must worship Him in spirit and in truth (Interactive Church).”

In her sermon today, our new pastor told us that God did not call her out of her comfort zone, a place where she had few administrative responsibilities, to fail in this new charge where she feels the weight of many great responsibilities.  Previously, she called upon us, all of us, to pull together to make manifest God’s Will for our church to to be a true place of reconciliation in a diversified community.  But we can’t do this, folks, not if we can’t get over our own comfort level issues.  We can’t do this if we’re more worried about having our needs met than we are worried about seeing others’ needs met.  So, if a more ethnically-rich worship service is what is needed to pull our African American brothers and sisters out of their homes Sunday mornings, I say, “Bring it on.”  If a more ethnically-rich worship service will help to transform seekers into committed, involved disciples who are willing to share in leadership and contribute to the many missions and ministries of the church, then I say, “Bring it on.”  Making disciples for Jesus Christ IS our mission.  Let’s get on with it.

I will be humble and reverent.  I will worship Him in spirit and in truth, and I will honor my pledge to continue supporting our Freedom to Follow capital campaign, at least until others are in place to take up the slack.  If you’re part of my congregation and you’re not exactly comfortable with the changes taking place, I humbly challenge you, in the spirit of Christian brotherhood, to do likewise.

Post your comment by clicking on the COMMENTS word below.

Published in: on June 25, 2006 at 8:32 pm  Comments (6)  

Public Schools in Texas

I was at a dinner party last night for medical interns in geriatrics at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical center, my wife being a nurse practitioner there.  None of the doctors or other medical staff present seemed to want to talk shop.  I guess they'd had enough of medicine for the day.  Anyway, one of the other spouses present, knowing that I teach ninth graders World Geography, asked me after our meal what I thought of Governor Perry's solution to the school funding problem in Texas.  My answer was that, despite our $2000 raise (our first in over twelve years) teachers here in Texas are still close to the bottom of the list of states in terms of compensation.  But salaries and associated retention of teachers with critically-needed skills are only the tip of the iceberg.  By trading off modest business taxes for reduced property taxes and taking advantage of a surplus in last year's budget, our legislators in Austin have just bought themselves a little time, that's all –that and something that they can brag about to their constituents.  With our population of English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) students growing more rapidly in Texas than our economy, it's just a matter of time before we'll be right back in the same financial pickle.  The problem, I think, is just symptomatic of an even larger problem:  legislators everywhere think that they know more about education than teachers do.

There's a great essay on-line about the problems with public education in America. It was written about three years ago by Jerry R. Goolsby and Dr. Walter Block.  Problem is, the right people haven't read it… this or else they're just too bullheaded to accept what is says.  Mr. Goolsby is Scholar of Music Industry Studies at Loyola University New Orleans (jgoolsby@loyno.edu), while Dr. Block (wblock@loyno.edu) is the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics in the College of Business Administration at Loyola University New Orleans.  See it at http://www.educationreview.homestead.com/2003GoolsbyBlock.html.

Post your comment by clicking on the COMMENTS link below.

Published in: on June 24, 2006 at 10:35 pm  Comments (1)  

Missile Defense?

A recent Associated Press article reports, “Many Asian nations would cheer if the Americans shot down a long-range missile tested by North Korea, but a failure would raise unsettling questions for allies that rely on the U.S. military umbrella. The response to North Korea is being watched by U.S. allies as a barometer of how committed Washington is to protecting them. Some already worry the drawn-out conflict in Iraq may make the United States wary of getting involved in other foreign conflicts.”

Hmmm… we do seem to be on the cusp of a put-up-or-shut-up situation here. Personally, after all the billions of dollars we’ve already spent on it, I’d really like to see us proceed with a real-world operational test of our anti-ballistic missile defense system.  Yes, Mr. Bush, I would roll the dice.  In my opion, we have little to loose at this point in terms of national prestige and everything to gain.

Post your comment by clicking on the COMMENTS word below.

Published in: on June 24, 2006 at 8:38 pm  Leave a Comment  
Newer Entries »