I'm Saying There's A Chance

I usually like listening to Jim Rome, but it's been a little much this week as he's been killing Ohio State, saying they'll be blown out by Southern Cal tomorrow in L.A.. Sure, little or no Beanie Wells spells a tough road for the Bucks, but they could shock the country tomorrow. What leads me to believe this?

1. USC isn't is good as everyone thinks. Yeah, that big win at Virginia looks impressive, but the Caviliers aren't the same team that made it to the Gator Bowl last year.

2. Ohio University was a trap game. The Buckeyes had a great showing against Youngstown State [considering Coach Tressel laid up so as not to thoroughly embarrass his old school] and lost Wells to injury. You know every kid on OSU's roster was looking ahead while the Bobcats were playing their bowl game in Columbus. So it makes sense that the game would be close. So I'm not as worried about that poor showing as some people were.

3. OSU hasn't shown them anything. While USC had but one warm-up game, OSU had two. If you looked at the gameplan, Ohio State was incredibly conservative, using a bread-and-butter offense. I expect much more tomorrow. Don't be surprised if Terrell Pryor touches the ball a few times tomorrow, and not just when behind center.

4. The OSU defense is solid. Most of these guys will play on Sundays after college. And they've only given up one score this year, and that was adjusting to a new mobile QB who entered the game after the starter got injured; the defense immediately adjusted and shut them out the rest of the game. While everyone's been hyping the Trojan defense, forgetting that this will be the toughest defense Mark Sanchez will have played against yet, USC will have difficulty scoring as well.

5. Beanie will play. I'm not really sure if Tressel is playing games about his status, but I imagine that Wells will be suited up and go Willis Reed on the Trojans and give his team a lift.

Don't get me wrong here: I'm not saying the Buckeyes rout. I'm just doubting that they'll be blown-out. And if they can stay in it, they have an excellent chance.

ADMISSION: I was so wrong. I am starting to doubt Jim Tressel. Even counting the John Cooper years, this is probably the worst loss I can ever remember as a Buckeyes fan.

Another September 11th

I always spend some time on September 11th watching television specials concerning the tragedy. I just have to watch. Even seven years later, the magnitude of that day is stifling.

My coworkers and I sat crowded around a small television that morning in awe of the scene. But the distinct memory I carry with me is the instant the second plane hit the World Trade Center. It was in that moment that we realized that this was no accident— America was under attack.

My heart still breaks about that day. May we never forget.

The Shack Book Review [Part Two]

I will admit that this rather lengthy post is written specifically to the Christian who is further along in their faith. New Christians or non-Christians might view this as petty and/or confusing, so those people might want to avoid this post altogether.

INTRODUCTION

Considering I wrote Part One of this review almost two months ago, you might need to glance back to see my original criticism of the best-selling book The Shack written by William Young. There you can also find a brief synopsis of the story. Since I'm not going to repeat it here, you might be a little lost without referencing Part One first.

Among my dislikes of The Shack listed there were a) it's poorly written fiction, b) it attempts to speak authoritatively under the guise of fiction and c) it hides behind an emotional narrative to present its theology. As more and more people are starting to read this book, I thought I'd finally get around to citing specific texts with which I had problems. I will admit that even though I took these notes while reading the book, I already passed it on to someone else, so I apologize if I don't fully recall the exact context of these quotes. And I typed a couple of pages of notes, so following is merely a handful of my concerns.

GOD SPEAKS

Upon receiving a written note from God, we read an inner-thought process of Mack reflecting on THE Written Word of God. We read,

"The thought of God passing notes did not fit well with his theological training. In seminary he had been taught that God had completely stopped any overt communication with moderns, preferring to have them only listen to and follow sacred Scripture, properly interpreted, of course. God's voice had been reduced to paper, and even that paper had to moderated and deciphered by the proper authorities and intellects. It seemed that direct communication with God was something exclusively for the ancients and uncivilized, while educated Westerners access to God was mediated and controlled by the intelligencia. Nobody wanted God in a book, just in a box. Especially an expensive one bound in leather with gilt edges, or was that guilt edges." [Page 64]

There is an edge to this quote. While made somewhat tongue-in-cheek, it's really the premise for what will follow throughout the rest of the book. It is a slighting of God's Written Word that will set the stage for "real, personal interaction with God." At its best, this statement is anti-intellectual; at its worst, it's a revolt against the submission to the Scriptures. Listen, I get it: some people worship the Bible more than God Himself, but you're not doing anyone a favor by disparaging the process here. Although this quote is subtle, I think it's deliberate. It's intended to presumptively backhand anyone who dares to criticize the experiential revelation that is to come. Young does a huge disservice to the concept of Biblical inspiration/interpretation by this needless one paragraph jab.

DID GOD FORSAKE JESUS?

On page 96, there's dialogue between Papa (God the Father) and Mack about the crucifixion of Jesus. Here's how it plays out:

PAPA: "We were there together" MACK: "At the cross? Now wait, I thought you left him — you know— 'My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?'" PAPA: "You misunderstood the mystery there. Regardless of what he felt at that moment, I never left him."

I would argue that Young misunderstood the mystery there. Despite many interpretations/references claiming otherwise, Jesus was indeed forsaken by God on the cross; not out of spite, mind you, rather as the fulfillment of his life as substitutionary atonement. Examine the scene at Calvary— an event without parallel— with the sun being darkened, and earthquake, the temple curtain torn, and dead people walking the streets. Our sin needed to be accounted for and the Holy God, in his judicial role, had to enact justice. That doesn't speak ill of God. It actually reflects poorly on us who forced God to have to take such a position.

Again, you might counter that this is no big deal, that substitutionary atonement isn't the point of this book. But it's the point of Christianity, so it needs to be noted.

ALL ABOUT RELATIONSHIP

The thrust of Young's book is the emphasis on relationship with God above everything else, stating on page 101 that the Trinity can be summarized as love and relationship. At the conclusion of the weekend, Mack said to the Spirit, "This weekend, sharing life with you has been far more illuminating than any of those [Seminary] answers." The Spirit responds, "And you will hear and see me in the Bible in fresh ways. Just don't look for rules and principles; look for relationship— a way of coming to be with us" (page 198).

While many Christians would swallow this whole, we need to realize the term "personal relationship with God" is merely a contextualization of the gospel message— a way of explaining the interaction between God and humanity. Notice that I said, "A way of explaining" and not, "THE way of explaining." The emergence of "the personal relationship" language can be dated after the Second World War, originating in American society then spreading globally, to reach a society that started to value the individual more than the communal.

This might be shocking, but "personal relationship with God" is not found in the Bible. In the NIV translation (produced in the early 1970's), the word "relationship" is only used three times in the entire book. Even the paraphrased Message Bible only uses "relationship" once in this kind of context. Throughout the Scriptures the predominant view of our interaction with God is explained in legal or covenantal terms. Unfortunately, this terminology turns most of us off because we'd rather not wrestle with that view of interaction with God— he as Judge/King and we as violator/servant.

Sure, we prefer a "personal relationship with God" because we'd rather view God in a human-to-human relationship; the thought of a judgmental God can be frightening and it reeks of old-school Christianity. So instead of viewing Jesus as the atonement of our sin, we think of him as our buddy. But regardless of how much disdain we carry for this "legal" interaction with God, it is consistently found in the Scriptures. And perhaps this is why The Shack is so popular: it embraces an interaction with God that we find comforting rather than frightening.

CONCLUSION

I could talk much more about all the qualms I had with this book, but I feel like I've said my peace. Hopefully you understand my opinion here: this is a flawed piece of fiction. Again, allow me to reiterate: I'm not saying that people shouldn't read this book, but we ought to realize that this is just one person's perspective on faith and it does not present a consistent explanation of the gospel message. If you're interested for a more compelling piece of literature, I suggest the Bible. It's good stuff.

If The Shack has made your relationship with God "more real," that's great. But I would challenge you to ask yourself why.

Walnut Hills Festival

Good news: I know what you can do this weekend.

The 2nd [or 3rd?] annual Walnut Hills Festival takes place this weekend on East McMillan Street at Peebles Corner.* This year, Echo is a sponsor and we're going to have a booth set up with kids games and crafts. We could always use some extra hands if you want some booth time. But more than that, come on out and see our neighborhood on its best day. Plus, the extended forcast is calling for good weather— no rain in sight.

I usually joke with people that the festival is when you'll see more white folk at Peebles corner than any other day of the year . . . except for the Flying Pig marathon . . . when they're running like hell to get through there. Too many people only see this section of our community by car. There's some great architecture in the business district, and they'll be a stage with plenty of entertainment. Seriously, what more could you ask for?

So block out some time between 11:00am and 6:00pm and join us. Fun times for all.

*You can park in the Krogers parking lot, entering at Gilbert just past McMillan.

More Stuff No One Cares About But Me

Sports-geek stuff here, but allow me to gloat.

Even though I've decided not to play fantasy football this fall, I'm a fantasy baseball addict. For six years now I've been in a keeper league. I'm usually competitive [my worse year was when we planted the church], winning one championship and making back-to-back playoff appearances in that time-span. This has been a rough season as I had two high draft picks turn out to be useless. With six weeks to go, I was in fourth place out of six teams in my division and I had reached that critical point: do I have a fire-sale or hang on in an attempt to make the play-offs? I decided to hang in there.

Glad I did.

We have five head-to-head match-ups per week. So in those last thirty games, I went 29-1 to win the division. That, friends, is finishing stong. It's been fun coming home after church on Sunday nights to see how my guys finished up, giving me a little piece of happiness in the midst of losing Cincinnati sports teams.

So we'll see how I do in the play-offs, but half the fun was getting there.

*And about the picture with this article: for some reason, I've always named my fantasy baseball teams "Manchester United" for my favorite professional soccer team— an even greater testimony to my dorkiness.

Live Bloggin' The VMA's

The MTV Video Music Awards, that is.

Well, I'm running a little late, but Kelly and I are watching it on DVR delay. So if you're RSS'ing this one . . . you might have to click to the site to catch the full take.

• Apparently the awards are taking place in Miley Cyrus' closet this year.
• Britney, Britney, Britney— despite what the paparazzi might tell you, we're over you.
• Rihanna does a Thriller impression.
• So here's Russell Brand. I read an interview about this being his chance to make it here in the US. After the opening monologue, I'm thinking we revoke his visa.
• Ah, now I get it. MTV gives Brittney the first award to try to force her back into relevance. I'm not sure people will but that [did Viacom produce her latest album?]
• First Lesson I Learned Tonight: Weezy = Lil' Wayne
• [Kelly and I both surmise] the Jonas Brothers were relegated to the side lot because MTV wants their demographic but didn't want the teeny-boppers in the actual arena.
• I can't believe that Katy Perry has any staying power. I'm thinking she'll be forgotten in a year.
• Second Lesson I Learned Tonight: The Million Dollar Man = Lil' Wayne
• I likes me some Paramore.
• Russell Brand: still tired.
• Not sure about Pink's outfits, but I think she's who Katy Perry wishes she could be.
• Jordin Sparks stands up for promise rings [after Russell Brand spent the majority of his jokes have centered around the Jonas Brothers and theirs] and will probably get more publicity than his jokes.
• About Christian Aguilera: First, the best singer in the house decides to lip sync. Second, she does a song that sounds like it was written for Rhianna. Third, I know she can't be thirty yet, but she almost seemed old.
• How's about some L.L. Cool J Goin' Back to Cali?
• Two awards for Britney? Fool me once, shame on you . . .
• So is Kid Rock a country music performer now? I'm so confused . . .
• OK, the fix is in: Britney wins video of the year. If MTV ever had any credibility, it's all used-up. See, everyone knows that their Movie Awards promote whomever shows up. But this network prided itself on being the musical authority but it's not getting killed by The Disney Channel and American Idol. Just put The Hills on a loop and take the rest of the year off.
• Kanye should've picked another song to end on. It was kinda a letdown.

These things keep getting weaker and weaker. Remind me so I don't waste my time next year.

You Can't Know Where You're Going . . .

. . . until you realize where you've been.

Even though my preaching habit is to continually teach through books of the Bible, I usually use my September teaching time to focus on Echo Church. It seems we always have people coming and going at Echo, so I like to notify the newbies and remind our regulars why we started the church in the first place.

But this month, I'm taking a different angle at this. Although we're steadily increasing the number of folks who live in this neighborhood, Walnut Hills is a tough place to really understand; one example of this: drive west to east on McMillan and you go from ghetto to gentrification— the socio-economic rainbow. So as I remind people why we're here, I'm going to try to explain what "here" is.

In my opinion, there are three factors that have shaped Walnut Hills: religion, race, and riches.* I've spent time the past couple of weeks in the downtown library doing research, in addition to driving down practically every street in our neighborhood. I've accumulated a ton of information and will try to figure out how to present it in digestable bits over the next month.

I know, this is the kind of research I should have done long before now. But it's not as if I haven't been trying to understand our community; I've constantly been learning more and more about Walnut Hills during the past three years. We're living in this neighborhood, meeting people and embracing its culture. This, however, is my first effort at an academic approach to analyzing the neighborhood. Hopefully it's something that I'll be able to tweak throughout the coming years.

So I hope you can join us at Echo this September for our series: God of the City.

*When I refer to "riches," I really mean "economics." But since I started out with two "R" words, I figured I'd side with mnemonics and keep it consistent. 

Getting Dirty

From an objective observer: the Democrats are getting brutal with this Sarah Palin stuff.

I can understand calling her a country bumpkin and bringing attention to her obvious inexperience [which, ironically, draws attention to Obama's inexperience] but this stuff about her family is getting dirty. A widely-read pro-Dem blog [no link] published that the youngest Palin child was not actually Sarah's but the child of her eldest daughter. This eventually brought forth news of the daughter's unplanned pregnancy, but many are still not backing off. Politics is a full-contact sport, but this is downright hateful.

As I wondered why Obama supporters are going pit-bull on Palin, I couldn't get it. Was it the woman fact— that Hillary supporters can't stand that someone like Palin will beat her to an historic moment? Is it that they now have to wave the banner of family values, claiming Palin is ignoring her family for professional accolades? Is it her conservative stance, especially when compared to McCain, something they can't stomach?

While all this may exacerbate the situation, I think the motivating factor is much more simple: fear.

As I've written before, a Democratic presidency in 2008 should have been a slam dunk. The bitter primary battle between Hillary and Obama derailed this somewhat. But McCain's image as a prototypical Republican [old, wealthy, white guy] still should have made this contest rather easy. And remember that, until this past week, many G.O.P.'ers didn't even like McCain. But with the announcement of Palin, the Republican base is solidifying. And this has made the Democrats fearful. And [forgive the metaphor] when you corner a frightened wild animal, it starts to bite.*

The Dems understand the importance of this election to their party. If they can't win with the most charismatic American politician in twenty years, following up a two-term administration with abysmal approval ratings, then you're in bad shape. For many, this isn't just AN election, this is THE election. And facing an opponent who has absolutely nothing to lose [why else does McCain chose Palin] the playbook is out the window. But it's a catch-22 because the more that the Dems spur the mainstream media to get personal with Palin, the more likely a backlash will develop. And even though it's the 21st century, I'm not sure you can get away with playing that kind of hardball with a lady.

I do have to give it up to Obama for saying that candidate's family lives should be off-limits, but I would be more impressed if he more vociferously publicly scolded those people for their stances.

Regardless, this thing will play out like the last two Presidential elections: neck and neck to the finish line.

*I can't believe I'm finally admitting this but, as a result of the Palin pick, the only way for a clear Dem victory would've been with Hillary on the ticket. You have to wonder how things would have gone down if McCain had to pick his running mate before Obama.

It's On Like Donkey Kong

Wow.

I didn't think they could do it, but the McCain campaign figured out how to counter the amazing spectacle that was Barack Obama's convention speech.

Even though Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin is a virtual unknown, McCain tabbed her as his running-mate. She is against abortion [to the extent that she gave birth to a Down-Syndrome child in April], the oldest of her five children is in the Army [and he's headed to Iraq in December], she's a lifelong NRA member [bringing back the gun vote McCain probably lost to Libertarian Bob Barr], her husband is a union member, and she's the only candidate that has executive experience.

Oh yeah, and SHE's a woman.

Now, regardless of what happens in November, our country will smash a barrier. I am telling you: this is now the most compelling Presidential election in US history.

Really quick analysis: I listened to Obama last night, and that was not the caliber of speech I expected. There will be plenty of time to go after McCain on specifics, but he decided to go after him last night. Obama had the most electrifying crowd in US political history and, basically, played it safe; he relied a little too much on the scene and not on visionary words [it was a mash-up of stump-speech material]. The football analogy would be that Obama ran the ball up the middle three-times in a row, content to punt and challenge McCain to out-do him. Of course, McCain can't out-do him as an orator. But he could pick a "veep" to steal his thunder. And, even though it's soon after the fact, I'm thinking he might have succeeded.

I would hope that the next few months will actually focus on the differences in ideology that make these tickets so incredibly different. But, instead, expect the same old crap, of pointless bickering over verbal gaffs because the media sucks.

It Is Certain

Objective observation here as I'm watching the Democratic Convention tonight:

Obama introduced a new mantra with which to nail McCain and relate his potential presidency to that of W.'s. This new catch-phrase: "Eight is Enough."

I'm shocked the Dem's were able to wait so long before pulling this one out. Get ready to hear this screamed by crowds from now until November.

And Dick Van Patten will start to wonder why his website traffic has increased.

Steve Jobs Is Dead

. . . um, no he isn't. But he might have been.

For ages, the media has stored pre-written obituaries of celebrities to give them a head start on unexpected deaths [ask my wife: editorial deadlines suck]. The Bloomberg financial newswire had a 17-page obit written up about the Apple founder and decided to update it this week. But upon completion, someone inadvertently published the article. Of course, it was instantly pulled when they realized this, but the funny thing about the interwebs is that those kinds of mistakes can't be erased.

Still, like the bizarre thought of being able to attend your own funeral, how weird would it be to read how people will remember your passing? I've even attempted to do this to myself, but it probably needs some revision.

So how do you want to be remembered? I'd get to work on it, because apparently that will be determined long before you're actually gone.

Yes, Hank, I Am Ready

We are on the cusp of yet another college football season. Even though I'm not quite ready to pass on the Bengals season yet [I should wait until after the first game, right?] I am rather excited about the Buckeyes.

It's been the best of times/worst of times for Ohio State fans the past couple of years. Two consecutive years appearing in the National Championship Game resulted in embarrassing losses. Even though I question how fair it is to be able to play for the title at home [LSU] it's still no excuse for the Bucks. And even though there's a lot of animosity towards OSU for their lackluster performances, the rest of the country had their chance to make it there and failed. Jim Tressel, OSU's coach, has built a consistent program. And this brings us to the dirty little secret:

The Buckeyes could very well make it to a third consecutive championship game.

Sure, the big test is in a few weeks at Southern Cal. But the Bucks are returning 18 starters on offense and defense. They have big game experience. They'll also use freshman phenom Terelle Pryor like Florida used Tebow a couple of years ago. If they get by USC, they should be playing for all the marbles in January.

And now that Time Warner Cable finally made a deal with the Big Ten Network, I'll be able to watch all of OSU's games on TV. It could just be a year to remember.

By the way, I will admit that I'm extremely interested to see how UC's football team performs this year. Not sure Bearcats football will ever surpass my passion for the Buckeyes, but they hardly ever play each other anyway.

The Hits Keep Comin'

Call me a bit morbid, be if I could pick another career, I'd say professional hitman would be a cool option. Sure, I would only do it if it involved knocking off people who really deserved it, and perhaps severely hurting people rather than actually killing them [I mean, I'd still try to hang on to my ministerial credentials]. Admit it: whenever you see hitmen in movies, you're thinking it's a pretty awesome career. Cool guns, unlimited bank account, the ability to travel— all wicked awesome. Please, friend, resist clicking over to monster.com to see if there any such job listings there.

Any-who, I had to laugh when I came across this real-life article this morning that detailed a woman strangling a burglar to death in her home. See, after further investigation, authorities discovered that it wasn't a mere burglar, but a hitman . . . hired by the woman's husband.  Apparently the hitman was in the house when 51 year-old Susan Kuhnhausen came home for work, and attacked her with a claw hammer. Kuhnhausen, who is in the middle of divorce proceedings with her husband [think she'll get back together with him?], disarmed the hitman who then proceeded to bite her. Then we arrive at today's official "Moment of Great Journalism," the statement from this article describing what happened next:

"A large woman, she was eventually able to get the slight [hitman] into a chokehold and police later found him dead in a hallway."

If this story can't get any crazier, there are other facts to consider, such as:

1. The woman's house had a security alarm. There was no sign of forced entry. The only person [besides Susan] who had the alarm code was the husband. Way to think of everything, dude.
2. The hired hitman was a janitor who worked for the husband.
3. The hired hitman had the husband's cellphone number in his backpack.
4. The husband managed an adult video store.

That's just classic. There's no way you could make this story up.

After that story, I think I'll leave my hitman dreams by the wayside, fearing death by the hands of a pissed-of 51 year-old large woman.

Professoring

I'm wrapping up my second class tomorrow night and I still haven't detailed my new role as Professor Carr.

Overall, it's been a great experience. I love teaching and I think that, as an urban minister, I have an interesting perspective to add to the process. Preparing for the lectures, however, has been laborious. And even though I'm excited to be teaching two more classes this fall, they are new one for me, meaning that I have even more preparation before me. I've read some interesting books, reminded myself of many facts I'd forgotten, and forced myself to think even more systematically than I have been.

I'd say the only thing I'm not to crazy about is the homework. You'd think the power-trip associated with grading would be addictive. Not so much. Perhaps it's because I have yet to find a red pen that fits me suitably. But I'd say it's more a result of the weekly assignments associated with intensive courses. It's a lot of homework to grade, and so far I've had some smaller class sizes. Still, I'm absolutely lovin' it; not enough to have wanted to do this vocationally (no offense to those teachers out there), but definitely enough to keep at it in an adjunct role.

What's really bizarre is that after finishing teaching on Tuesday, I start up classes at Xavier on Thursday.

For someone whose favorite part of school was recess, I'm amazed at the amount of time I'm now spending in the classroom.

Transitioning Back To Life

I haven't posted as frequently this summer. Nothing personal; I still enjoy the blog. It just seems like there's always an excuse not to.

The most recent excuse was that I didn't quite know how to follow up my last post. It seems inappropriate to make little jokes or talk about my pet peeves after previously referencing a child's death. But even though I've been lamenting this tragedy that past few days, I somehow seem to function throughout the rest of year when there are just as many unspeakable incidents that happen around the world every day. Of course, we tend to overlook these events, only affected when disaster comes to our own neighborhood.

Although I can't really claim to know Dr. Edwards personally, we had a class or two together in grad school (I had many friends in that Counseling program with her who can claim a much closer bond). What I do remember from our limited interaction is that she was a very kind person. She was also somewhat introverted, so this intense media attention compounds the tragedy. Regardless of what rabid web commenters will offer, I observe that she was not the prototypical uber-professional woman forsaking her child for career. Despite the many that will continue to vilify her, I hope for comfort in this situation and encourage you to keep Dr Edwards, her friends and her family in your prayers.

But, like with every tragedy, those of us left behind must continue to grapple with everyday life. And that means moving forward. When the tears dry out, we go back to laughing, and thinking, and loving— transitioning back to life. So even though our lives are no longer the same, they still need to be lived.

Weep and Pray

The local media has picked up on a horrific story at my alma mater. It seems the baby daughter of a faculty member was left in an automobile today. She passed away. It is an incredibly sad situation and your prayers would be greatly appreciated. School is just getting started there and a bunch of young adults, along with many of my friends on staff there, will be scarred by this event for years to come. Ironically, I spent a considerable amount of time at Cincinnati Christian University today. When I first arrived on campus this morning, I took a call from an old college friend and decided to talk to him while taking in the beautiful view of the city. During this time (I like to walk while I talk) I apparently walked back and forth past the car where the little child was left.

Didn't see a thing. Why would I have looked?

I think the windows of the vehicle were tinted, which could explain why it took the entire day before she was discovered. But it's hitting me very hard tonight, forced to think that I was within a few yards of this little infant in need and had no idea.

It's too sad, especially for her parents. I'm sure it was an accident, so before the media forces a critical eye towards them, and the public looks for justice, let's stop for a moment. Let's shed some tears for this family for their loss. And let's hug our children tonight.

A little baby died. And it's incredibly sad.

Understand Buffoonery

OK, so once again the Bengals will be a object of ridicule tomorrow when they announce the [re]signing of Chris Henry. Since the most recent charges on Henry were dismissed he's allowed back in the league, but will still face a four week suspension to start the season.

I'm not going to lie: I'm lit up about this right now. This is, perhaps, the worst roster move in the history of Cincinnati sports.

Before people start talking all sort of crap about Marvin Lewis, recognize what this is: this is entirely a Mike Brown decision.

Marvin Lewis categorically stated that he was done with Henry. But a couple of weeks ago, Mike Brown was quoted as saying,

"I happen to be a redeemer. I think people can be made better and right. If that's a fault, so be it. These guys misstepped, they made mistakes, they paid prices for it that have been verging on ruinous, but that doesn't mean I dislike them personally."

That is such crap. That's not redemption, that's buying loyalty with the hopes that it will eventually pay dividends. True redemption would be giving Chris Henry a job as a ballboy. You're just buying low with the hopes of selling high.

The move to resign Henry is all Mike Brown's doing and Marvin Lewis will be forced to go along with it— especially since, in any other town, Marvin would be on the hotseat for the lack of playoff appearances. So since Marvin has no leverage (with no opportunity to jump ship for another coaching job), he's going to have to eat crow and look like an idiot, struggling to explain why he changed his mind. And, of course, he didn't change his mind. Mikey wants it, so he gets it.

Understand what you've done here, Mike: you've cut your head coach off at the knees so you could be the hero. You brought in another receiver that you really didn't need, neutering your head coach in the process. And you wonder why Chad Johnson acts out the way he does. How is Marvin supposed to control a locker room that understands that his word isn't the final authority. I now wonder: was Marvin fully willing to take those first-round picks from Washington and rebuffed by you? Your micromanaging continually harms this franchise and sullies your reputation as well as that of your employees. It's beyond embarrassing.

This is a textbook case of poor leadership— right in my own backyard. Sure, a Super Bowl victory would help everyone forget how stupid this seems now, but Chris Henry ain't getting us there.

What A Waste

Although I'm not a hyper-megachurch kind of guy, I really like Rick Warren. He's had ever opportunity to take advantage of his Christian celebrity status for personal gain and continually refuses to do so. Also, he's using his large church's influence to support issues like poverty and AIDS, so even though his congregation is large, it's influence is not intentionally introverted.

And I can understand why he thought it would be a great idea to get the two Presidential candidates together this past weekend for an interview at his church. Warren was trying to give both men the opportunity to answer questions on faith and morality so the people could see for themselves, as well as highlighting the importance of the evangelical vote. But even though he had good intentions, I wasn't convinced this was a good idea. True, Warren will not endorse any one candidate and maintain objectivity throughout the election season[which will keep his church from the wrath of the IRS], but the American political arena is a sewage pit. And you cannot dwell near sewage and leave untainted.

The example of this is the controversy surrounding McCain's decent performance at the forum. After a coin flip, it was deemed that Obama would go first and McCain would be in a "cone of silence" [Warren's words] until his turn. My observation after viewing much of the exchange online: Obama was mediocre and McCain came off much better than expected. But apparently McCain was still en route to the venue during Obama's time, allowing for the possibility that he might have heard the questions, and giving his detractors plenty of ammunition with which to attack both McCain AND WARREN HIMSELF.

My opinion: Warren didn't lie about thinking McCain was sequestered, trusting that McCain would abide by his word. Now whether or not the McCain campaign actually did this, I can't say. I wouldn't even imagine to try and vouch for them on this issue. But here on Monday, it's a controversy. And I wouldn't be surprised if it led tonight's evening news.

So now, Warren is under scrutiny for something ridiculous, and his church is going to be called to defend him. Despite all the amazing things that he's done for people around the country and around the world, the general public will begin to associate him with helping John McCain look better than Barack Obama— whether it's the truth or not.

Like I've said here before, I love to watch politics. But I observe as if it's a sporting event, not really caring who wins or loses. When the church gets involved in the political arena, there is little chance that anything good can come out of it.

And I prefer not to smell like sewage.

Nikon or Canon?

I'm ready to brave a new frontier:

It's finally time to buy a DSLR.

Since the advent of the digital camera I've started to really enjoy photography*. My first two [decent] digital cameras have been of the Canon point-and-click variety. They've done a rather good job. Our pictures from our Israel/Paris trip are excellent, making me glad for the new technology. My most reason camera has been awesome as well. But it still doesn't give me everything I need to take the best quality photos. I mean, Kaelyn has yet to have an "official sitting" at a studio, I think the step up is valid. So now, the search begins.

This isn't going to be an impulse buy. I'm trying to do some meticulous research. In the end, though, it basically comes down to two brands: Canon or Nikon**. Really, most of the articles I read are generous to both brands; they state that regardless of what camera you chose, the most important aspect to good photography is the photographer. But once you pick a brand, you're basically locked-in for life. They make the lenses so you can continue to use them with newer camera bodies, but they aren't compatible between brands. I know my father-in-law is a Nikon guy, and I'm sorta leaning that way right now.

So as I chew on this decision, I thought I'd open it up to y'all. Do you own a DSLR? What's your brand? Any advice on how to proceed?

*You can check out some of my photos here.

**I don't know about you, but I find it peculiar that both brand names seem like they should have a double consonant in the middle.

Stick the Landing

I know nothing about gymnastics except that wife wants to watch it during the Olympics. That said, a few observations:

1) I was thoroughly embarrassed a few nights ago when the men's gymnastics team celebrated vociferously after winning the bronze medal. Yes, the bronze. I get it: they weren't expected to win any medal at all so they were excited, but I never thought you competed to win third place. Exacerbating the situation was them shouting victoriously into the camera, "Yeah, America! Never give up! This is how we roll!" Seriously: you roll by proudly lauding finishing as second runner up? To quote the Intimidator, "second place is just the first loser."

Even more interesting was the reaction rivaled that of the gold winning Chinese squad. But when the cameras panned to show the second-place Japanese team, they were devastated; it was as if they had just been put on death row. Additionally, compared to the somber reaction of the U.S. women's squad last night (who only finished second) and I declare that those Japanese competitors and the U.S. ladies made me a proud American male.

2) Speaking of the women failing in their gold medal bid, I have to give it up to the girl that self-destructed. She fell off that big long bar thingy [you know what I mean], as well as screwing up on her floor exercise. I was sure she was going to burst into tears but she held it together, again, garnering more of my respect than the men's gymnastics team.

3) The shocking thing to me was how young those Chinese ladies looked. Perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised. The big controversy of the event was whether or not the Chinese government faked the birthdates of a couple of the girls on the team [and apparently the New York Times thought enough to investigate it]. It makes sense that having younger, smaller girls on these narrow apparatuses [is that right?] would be a major advantage. But I'm sure the Chinese officials have enough integrity that they would never imagine cheating in order to win Olympic gold. Right?

Alright, enough gymnastics talk. I'm going to drink a beer, smoke a cig, and watch Rambo so I can refuel my low testosterone level.