I think almost every system we have went down today in some form. We had a motherboard die in a domain controller last night, and Doug and the technician replaced it, but the time for the server was set to PM not AM (it was after one in the morning). Turns out the domain controller was the time server for the network. When we changed it back to AM this morning, everything went haywire. Terminal servers stopped working, the e-mail cluster crashed, accounting systems inaccessible, web portals locked up, backup jobs failed - it was a mess. I got several of the more minor problems resolved, but Doug has been on the phone with tech support for over eight hours trying to resolve the e-mail problem. It's nasty stuff.
LJ just IM'ed me and asked me how the day has been. I told her that it's been terrible. She asked if I had gotten everything fixed, and I said yes, except for the e-mail, and she said, "why isn't that a good day?" I told her that in IT, a good day is when nothing unexpected happens. Sure it's challenging to solve problems, and rewarding to fix a system that lesser mortals would have given up for dead, but most IT folks (at least the ones I know) would rather have things peaceful and boring.
Well, looks like Doug's making progress. Talk to you later.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Christmas album reviews
Is it too early to start talking about Christmas? I realize that the Halloween "holiday" doesn't even take place until next week, but as we have not really spent any time focusing on or talking to the kids about Halloween, I keep thinking it has already passed. My Halloween plans typically revolve around not going to the office costume party and trying to figure out how not to be at home for the trick-or-treaters.
Anyway, every year I typically buy one or more new Christmas CDs. I call it a tradition, but the only one who really pays any attention to the tradition is me, so that's probably a stretch. The last month or so, I have gotten several e-mails from Third Day regarding their new Christmas album, Christmas Offerings. As I have stated before, Third Day is one of the few Christian groups that I listen to with any frequency, and since the other two albums in the "Offerings" series have been pretty good, I was looking forward to this one. I bought it online when it was released. I also saw a new James Taylor Christmas CD at Wal*Mart the other day and picked it up on a whim. This one is titled, very originally, James Taylor at Christmas.
I listened to the Third Day CD in the van for the first time last week, and I have to say I was disappointed. I generally expect Third Day to do some interesting things on several of the songs on any particular album, and to put together a real gem or two. The original Offerings album begins with "King of Glory," which is one of my all-time favorite songs. It rocks, it quotes directly from the Bible, and it builds from this low-key guitar and vocal piece to a powerful full-throated band and choir number that can bring tears to your eyes if you're not careful. Even Offerings II: All I Have to Give features a few rousing numbers like "Sing a Song," although overall it is inferior to the first. The source of my let-down on the Christmas album is that I expected at least a couple of tunes that Third Day really put their stamp on, maybe even a couple of rockers. The best song on the album is probably "Do You Hear What I Hear?" which is just a live version of a song that they did for one of those in-store promotional Christian CDs that we already had anyway. The sad thing about it is that every one of the tracks could have been done by just about anyone - nothing terrible, but just 'blah.' There are a few original songs scattered amongst the traditional ones, and while they are slightly more interesting musically, in my opinion they are all lyrically weak. Without Mac Powell's distinct voice, well, I'd probably never listen to it again.
So before I bought the JT album, I had this musical washout on my hands. I picked up the James Taylor disc mainly because his Greatest Hits CD is a perennial favorite of ours, and I know he still has the voice. This album, which turns out to be a re-packaging of a Hallmark exclusive album released in 2004, nevertheless turned out to be a surprise. The arrangements of the traditional songs are jazzy and interesting, and as I said before, JT still has the voice. I remember LJ coming into the room while I was listening to it and asking "Is that 'Jingle Bells'?" She wasn't sure, because it sounded different - i.e., not like every other version of "Jingle Bells" ever recorded. I mean, once you've heard Bing Crosby sing "White Christmas," is there ever a need to hear anyone else attempt it? Negatory, good buddy. Aside from "Baby, It's Cold Outside," which I got tired of years ago (no offense to JT or Natalie Cole) this is an album I can tell that I'm going to listen to again and again for years to come.
Anyway, every year I typically buy one or more new Christmas CDs. I call it a tradition, but the only one who really pays any attention to the tradition is me, so that's probably a stretch. The last month or so, I have gotten several e-mails from Third Day regarding their new Christmas album, Christmas Offerings. As I have stated before, Third Day is one of the few Christian groups that I listen to with any frequency, and since the other two albums in the "Offerings" series have been pretty good, I was looking forward to this one. I bought it online when it was released. I also saw a new James Taylor Christmas CD at Wal*Mart the other day and picked it up on a whim. This one is titled, very originally, James Taylor at Christmas.
I listened to the Third Day CD in the van for the first time last week, and I have to say I was disappointed. I generally expect Third Day to do some interesting things on several of the songs on any particular album, and to put together a real gem or two. The original Offerings album begins with "King of Glory," which is one of my all-time favorite songs. It rocks, it quotes directly from the Bible, and it builds from this low-key guitar and vocal piece to a powerful full-throated band and choir number that can bring tears to your eyes if you're not careful. Even Offerings II: All I Have to Give features a few rousing numbers like "Sing a Song," although overall it is inferior to the first. The source of my let-down on the Christmas album is that I expected at least a couple of tunes that Third Day really put their stamp on, maybe even a couple of rockers. The best song on the album is probably "Do You Hear What I Hear?" which is just a live version of a song that they did for one of those in-store promotional Christian CDs that we already had anyway. The sad thing about it is that every one of the tracks could have been done by just about anyone - nothing terrible, but just 'blah.' There are a few original songs scattered amongst the traditional ones, and while they are slightly more interesting musically, in my opinion they are all lyrically weak. Without Mac Powell's distinct voice, well, I'd probably never listen to it again.
So before I bought the JT album, I had this musical washout on my hands. I picked up the James Taylor disc mainly because his Greatest Hits CD is a perennial favorite of ours, and I know he still has the voice. This album, which turns out to be a re-packaging of a Hallmark exclusive album released in 2004, nevertheless turned out to be a surprise. The arrangements of the traditional songs are jazzy and interesting, and as I said before, JT still has the voice. I remember LJ coming into the room while I was listening to it and asking "Is that 'Jingle Bells'?" She wasn't sure, because it sounded different - i.e., not like every other version of "Jingle Bells" ever recorded. I mean, once you've heard Bing Crosby sing "White Christmas," is there ever a need to hear anyone else attempt it? Negatory, good buddy. Aside from "Baby, It's Cold Outside," which I got tired of years ago (no offense to JT or Natalie Cole) this is an album I can tell that I'm going to listen to again and again for years to come.
YEEEESSSSSS!
I have finally established my ownership of all things Oracle and have completed the never-ending Oracle project. I resolved the final outstanding issue with the poll, and everything is working at least as well as it did before I ran the upgrade. You don't have to know what this means to celebrate with me. Whoo-hoo!
Friday, October 20, 2006
Laundry time
I don't usually do a whole lot to keep the house clean (just ask LJ!). I have allergies to dust and mold and other things, and vacuuming or dusting just knocks me over. I hate washing dishes, partly because it's just nasty, but mostly because I am almost 6' 5", and I have to bend over the sink to do it and it makes my back hurt. So pretty much the only household task I don't mind doing is laundry. Since I was home today and didn't have anything I needed to do, I have been washing clothes all day, and I do mean all day. I think I have washed somewhere between 12-15 loads so far, and I still have at least three left.
Usually we don't have quite this much laundry, and LJ hasn't even been falling down on the job. We recently bought some winter clothes for HannahBanana and BenjiBoy. We also got last year's clothes down from the attic and closets and cleaned them for NoahKrakatoa and AbsCadabs. I just had a birthday, so there are some clothes from that. Plus, LJ got a bag of shirts from an aunt that she couldn't wear any more. Add it all up and you get a $90 water bill.
You know, while we were shopping for the kids, I looked around at dresses. For a seven-year-old and a three-year-old, there were dresses that were $60 and $70 and up. I guess that's a drop in the bucket for some people, but I'll bet there's not an article of clothing in my whole wardrobe that I spent $70 or more on. I just don't see the point of spending that much on an outfit that they are going to wear just one season. And we at least have the advantage of using everything twice!
The other thing that really aggravates me is the clothing for girls. Once you get past about two or three, the choices for girls are pretty slim. I don't mean that you can't find clothing, because there is obviously tons of it. But we have had a hard time finding clothing that is appropriate for a seven-year-old to wear that makes her look like a girl and not a hooker. We finally gave up on finding her a pair of jeans that fit modestly. I don't necessarily want her to look like she's Mennonite or anything, but you would think that there would be a few choices for people who don't want their daughters to dress like Eva Longoria. Is that too much to ask?
Well, back to work for me. Now I have to go fold 12-15 loads of laundry!
Usually we don't have quite this much laundry, and LJ hasn't even been falling down on the job. We recently bought some winter clothes for HannahBanana and BenjiBoy. We also got last year's clothes down from the attic and closets and cleaned them for NoahKrakatoa and AbsCadabs. I just had a birthday, so there are some clothes from that. Plus, LJ got a bag of shirts from an aunt that she couldn't wear any more. Add it all up and you get a $90 water bill.
You know, while we were shopping for the kids, I looked around at dresses. For a seven-year-old and a three-year-old, there were dresses that were $60 and $70 and up. I guess that's a drop in the bucket for some people, but I'll bet there's not an article of clothing in my whole wardrobe that I spent $70 or more on. I just don't see the point of spending that much on an outfit that they are going to wear just one season. And we at least have the advantage of using everything twice!
The other thing that really aggravates me is the clothing for girls. Once you get past about two or three, the choices for girls are pretty slim. I don't mean that you can't find clothing, because there is obviously tons of it. But we have had a hard time finding clothing that is appropriate for a seven-year-old to wear that makes her look like a girl and not a hooker. We finally gave up on finding her a pair of jeans that fit modestly. I don't necessarily want her to look like she's Mennonite or anything, but you would think that there would be a few choices for people who don't want their daughters to dress like Eva Longoria. Is that too much to ask?
Well, back to work for me. Now I have to go fold 12-15 loads of laundry!
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
EC Concert
Tomorrow night LJ and I are going to hear Eric Clapton in concert in Birmingham. Two other folks from the IT department are going, so that should be pretty cool. I'm really looking forward to it. Mom and Dad are keeping the young'uns for us, and I'm taking the rest of the week off from work (icing on the cake). This will be the third time I've seen EC in concert. My brother and I went to see him in Birmingham in 1992, when concert tickets could still be had for under $30. LJ and I saw him for our anniversary in 2001 at the Pyramid in Memphis, which was a rocking show. Robert Cray is opening for him, and I'm excited about hearing him too. Should be fun!
I always enjoy talking with folks about concerts that they have attended in their lives, especially if they have seen a few. Here are some concert highlights and lowlights from my past:
I always enjoy talking with folks about concerts that they have attended in their lives, especially if they have seen a few. Here are some concert highlights and lowlights from my past:
- Best Performance - James Taylor, Coleman Coliseum, Tuscaloosa, AL
- Best Opening Act - Taj Mahal (opening for Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers), Coleman Coliseum, Tuscaloosa, AL
- Best Venue - Alabama Theatre, Birmingham, AL (Bob Dylan)
- Most Sentimental Show - John Denver, BJCC Concert Hall, Birmingham, AL (just months before he died)
- Best Song in Concert - "River of Tears" - Eric Clapton, The Pyramid, Memphis, TN
- Worst Concert - Reba McEntire, BJCC Arena, Birmingham, AL
- Most Pot Smokers - Dave Matthews Band, Oak Mountain Amphitheatre, Pelham, AL
- Best Christian Concert - Third Day and Michael W. Smith, BJCC Arena, Birmingham, AL
- Biggest Letdown - Ray Charles, City Stages, Birmingham, AL (only played for 30 minutes)
- Biggest Surprise - Kool and the Gang, City Stages, Birmingham, AL
- Closest to Stage (Whole Concert) - Tie: Taj Mahal, City Stages, Birmingham, AL; B.B. King, CityFest, Tuscaloosa, AL
- Closest to Stage (End of Concert) - Bob Dylan, Alabama Theatre, Birmingham, AL
- Farthest from Stage - Bonnie Raitt, City Stages, Birmingham, AL
- Most Singalong-Friendly Show - Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, Coleman Coliseum, Tuscaloosa, AL
- Most Enjoyable Show - Chris Isaak, City Stages, Birmingham, AL
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Thirty-Three
Today is my birthday. I turned 33 years old this morning at 7:55 CDT. Now one doesn't usually think of 33 as a milestone birthday, but I have thought about it as such ever since I realized as a child that Jesus was 30 when he began his ministry and (most likely) 33 when he was crucified (based on the number of Passovers mentioned in the gospels). I remember when my parents turned 33 thinking about the fact that they were the same age as Jesus when he had completed his ministry on earth, and now I am as well.
Now if you consider it, that's pretty profound. Jesus had spoken and accomplished everything that he was to do on this earth (until his return) in 33 years, more or less.
Then I look at my life. Have I accomplished everything (or anything) that God has planned for me? Well, that's a question that I'm not sure I can answer. Only God knows what he has ordained for my future. But as I reflect on my life, there are some things for which I am grateful - an intelligent, funny, beautiful wife; four fantastic children; a loving, supportive extended family; a good job, doing work I enjoy; a home in a nice, safe neighborhood; and most of all, a Savior who loves me in spite of who I am. Not bad for 33.
Now if you consider it, that's pretty profound. Jesus had spoken and accomplished everything that he was to do on this earth (until his return) in 33 years, more or less.
Then I look at my life. Have I accomplished everything (or anything) that God has planned for me? Well, that's a question that I'm not sure I can answer. Only God knows what he has ordained for my future. But as I reflect on my life, there are some things for which I am grateful - an intelligent, funny, beautiful wife; four fantastic children; a loving, supportive extended family; a good job, doing work I enjoy; a home in a nice, safe neighborhood; and most of all, a Savior who loves me in spite of who I am. Not bad for 33.
Monday, October 09, 2006
World leader quiz
Leslie took this world leader quiz last week and her result was that she was Abe Lincoln. So she was very enthusiastic about having me take the same quiz. I came out as Saddam Hussein. The money quote was "People who don't like you better like chemical weapons." I'll admit that gave me a good long laugh. Hey, who says that evil dictators can't laugh at themselves?
Well, that was something!
When I told you all that it might be a while before I updated again, I had no idea how long it would really be. My Oracle upgrade did not go as planned, and we never made it to Charlotte last week. I thought about sharing the whole ordeal with you, but suffice to say I worked over 52 hours on the upgrade last week, including a 36-hour stretch without sleep, not counting eight hours of travel time to and from the ATL. So I didn't have much time or clarity of thought to blog last week.
Of course, all that is old news and this week we're on to fresh challenges. My boss has asked me to come up with a vision statement for my group, and informed me today that we are going to do things differently next year. I think my response was about five seconds of silence, followed by, "Okay."
That reminds me of a story that we like to tell about Microsoft. Several years ago, we were audited by Microsoft and they asked us to document all of our software licensing. Long story short, we ended up spending lots of money on software, including purchasing their brand new Software Assurance on much of our server software. Three years later, we were visited by Microsoft reps again, this time selling us on the benefits of continuing our SA contracts. My boss and I had talked prior to their visit about how we had spent so much money on SA for all of our SQL Servers, and that since Microsoft had not delivered on their promised upgrade to SQL Server during those three years, we were going to confront the Microsoft guys about it and see what they had to say for themselves. The conversation went something like this:
Us - "You know, we bought Software Assurance for our SQL Servers because it was a better deal than relicensing every one of them, provided that there was a new version of SQL Server."
MS - "Okay."
Us - "So it's really a ripoff to have paid 60% on top of the software cost to get an upgrade that was never delivered."
MS - "Okay."
Us - "Now you're asking us to re-up for SA, and we can't see why it's a good investment, given the fact that we haven't seen any new versions of any of the software for which we purchased SA in the first place."
MS - "Okay."
Every time we made a statement about how we felt abused and misused by their licensing extortion, they acknowledged that we had spoken without admitting they had done anything wrong, or even attempting to make a case for SA. It was really mind blowing, and yet funny at the same time. So now every time someone says something to me for which I have no response, my response is "Okay." Don't tell me that Microsoft is good for nothing!
So anyway, my boss explained further that I shouldn't worry and it was going to be good for everyone. I have no idea what that means. And the cynic in me is already struggling with the whole vision statement assignment. But, I'm going to do my best to try to synopsize our goals in a short, visionary fashion.
Of course, all that is old news and this week we're on to fresh challenges. My boss has asked me to come up with a vision statement for my group, and informed me today that we are going to do things differently next year. I think my response was about five seconds of silence, followed by, "Okay."
That reminds me of a story that we like to tell about Microsoft. Several years ago, we were audited by Microsoft and they asked us to document all of our software licensing. Long story short, we ended up spending lots of money on software, including purchasing their brand new Software Assurance on much of our server software. Three years later, we were visited by Microsoft reps again, this time selling us on the benefits of continuing our SA contracts. My boss and I had talked prior to their visit about how we had spent so much money on SA for all of our SQL Servers, and that since Microsoft had not delivered on their promised upgrade to SQL Server during those three years, we were going to confront the Microsoft guys about it and see what they had to say for themselves. The conversation went something like this:
Us - "You know, we bought Software Assurance for our SQL Servers because it was a better deal than relicensing every one of them, provided that there was a new version of SQL Server."
MS - "Okay."
Us - "So it's really a ripoff to have paid 60% on top of the software cost to get an upgrade that was never delivered."
MS - "Okay."
Us - "Now you're asking us to re-up for SA, and we can't see why it's a good investment, given the fact that we haven't seen any new versions of any of the software for which we purchased SA in the first place."
MS - "Okay."
Every time we made a statement about how we felt abused and misused by their licensing extortion, they acknowledged that we had spoken without admitting they had done anything wrong, or even attempting to make a case for SA. It was really mind blowing, and yet funny at the same time. So now every time someone says something to me for which I have no response, my response is "Okay." Don't tell me that Microsoft is good for nothing!
So anyway, my boss explained further that I shouldn't worry and it was going to be good for everyone. I have no idea what that means. And the cynic in me is already struggling with the whole vision statement assignment. But, I'm going to do my best to try to synopsize our goals in a short, visionary fashion.
Monday, October 02, 2006
The second week begins
So I'm on my second week now of business traveling. This time I am in Atlanta again for a day or two, then on to Charlotte, NC for a couple of days. In Atlanta, I'm finally performing my 28-step procedure for the Oracle upgrade from 8.1.7.4 to 10.2.0.2. After many false starts, I eventually performed it successfully three times on the test and development environments, so I am hopeful that this will go smoothly in production. Chris, Doug and I are all up here at the co-lo to work on the upgrade. Chris is observing me, since he will eventually take over the Oracle support duties as DBA. Doug is here to test the mail and application after the upgrade is complete, and he's going on with me to Charlotte to install a server up there.
Anyway, I may or may not have time to blog since we're doing a lot of driving, but I'll try to keep you posted on how things are going. Pray for a safe and successful trip!
Anyway, I may or may not have time to blog since we're doing a lot of driving, but I'll try to keep you posted on how things are going. Pray for a safe and successful trip!
Friday, September 29, 2006
This should scare you...
The UK Telegraph reported this week that China has been attacking U.S. surveillance satellites with lasers in attempts to disable them while they pass over China. If this had been the Soviets, we'd be at Defcon 2 by now.
SEE ARTICLE HERE:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/26/wchina226.xml
SEE ARTICLE HERE:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/26/wchina226.xml
Thursday, September 28, 2006
South Carolina loses a close one
Well, I just got through watching the Auburn-South Carolina football game, and the Barn won 24-17, with USC missing out on a tying touchdown on the last fourth down of the game. I had no thought that South Carolina would be able to stay with Auburn, but they made it interesting up until the very end. Their quarterback, Syvelle Newton, is a player. He single-handedly kept them in the game.
On top of going for it (successfully, no less) on several fourth downs, the biggest difference between Tommy Tuberville and Alabama head coach Mike Shula was there for everyone to see in the third quarter. The Barn is leading by 4 at the half, and drives down the field in 17 plays to finally kick a field goal and take a seven-point lead. So what does Wingnut do? He goes for the jugular. Onside kick, drive down the field, and score the touchdown. South Carolina did not touch the ball for the entire third quarter. Twenty-nine straight offensive plays.
Even so, USC didn't give up. Newton actually threw the tying touchdown pass, but his freshman wide receiver dropped it. South Carolina still gained one more first down, but couldn't pull it out. Unfortunately, since Alabama is likely to get blown out this Saturday by #5 Florida, this looks like a long weekend ahead.
On top of going for it (successfully, no less) on several fourth downs, the biggest difference between Tommy Tuberville and Alabama head coach Mike Shula was there for everyone to see in the third quarter. The Barn is leading by 4 at the half, and drives down the field in 17 plays to finally kick a field goal and take a seven-point lead. So what does Wingnut do? He goes for the jugular. Onside kick, drive down the field, and score the touchdown. South Carolina did not touch the ball for the entire third quarter. Twenty-nine straight offensive plays.
Even so, USC didn't give up. Newton actually threw the tying touchdown pass, but his freshman wide receiver dropped it. South Carolina still gained one more first down, but couldn't pull it out. Unfortunately, since Alabama is likely to get blown out this Saturday by #5 Florida, this looks like a long weekend ahead.
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Weird things to eat
Have you ever wondered how we as human beings ever got into eating the things we do? I find it fascinating to think about how people discovered that certain fish or animals or plants were good to eat (or not), and even more so, how people have come up with thousands of different ways to mix ingredients in pleasing combinations.
One of the great things about being in a big city this week is that there are literally hundreds of places close to the hotel to eat, and we have been to Italian, Thai, Caribbean, and Mexican, just to name a few. Tonight though, I tried something new - escargot au fromage. Yes, snails. Well, just one snail. It was interesting. Not exactly what I expected. It wasn't particularly tasty, in my opinion, but it wasn't slimy or particularly odd in texture. It was sort of like a mushroom, but the taste was just different. And yes, I think it is the weirdest thing I have ever eaten, although calamari is a close second. I followed it up shortly afterward with a filet mignon, just to be safe.
So what's the weirdest thing you've ever eaten?
One of the great things about being in a big city this week is that there are literally hundreds of places close to the hotel to eat, and we have been to Italian, Thai, Caribbean, and Mexican, just to name a few. Tonight though, I tried something new - escargot au fromage. Yes, snails. Well, just one snail. It was interesting. Not exactly what I expected. It wasn't particularly tasty, in my opinion, but it wasn't slimy or particularly odd in texture. It was sort of like a mushroom, but the taste was just different. And yes, I think it is the weirdest thing I have ever eaten, although calamari is a close second. I followed it up shortly afterward with a filet mignon, just to be safe.
So what's the weirdest thing you've ever eaten?
Monday, September 25, 2006
Monday Night Football
So, I'm sitting here in the hotel room in watching MNF on ESPN. Now, I don't often get to watch football any more, so this is the first pro game I've seen from the beginning in a while. Tonight is a "special" night because the New Orleans Saints are playing Atlanta in the first game at the Louisiana Superdome since Hurricane Katrina. Now, I know that's a big deal for New Orleans, and it's a big deal, I guess, for the NFL. But the hyperbole from everyone associated with this broadcast is just unbelievable. If I hear one more thing about how "what was once a scene of devastation is now a scene of celebration," I'm going to vomit. The pre-game show included U2 and Green Day, and the hype is almost the equivalent of a Super Bowl. I mean, did either of these teams even make the playoffs last year? It's just a football game people. Quit acting like it's more significant than that.
Now, as a football fan, I want to give props to Roman Harper, former Crimson Tider and rookie starting cornerback for the Saints. Halfway through the first quarter, he's already made two noteworthy plays, including breaking up what would have been a touchdown pass. Good job, Roman!
Now, as a football fan, I want to give props to Roman Harper, former Crimson Tider and rookie starting cornerback for the Saints. Halfway through the first quarter, he's already made two noteworthy plays, including breaking up what would have been a touchdown pass. Good job, Roman!
SQL Server 2005 training
I am in Atlanta this week, attending SQL Server 2005 administration training. This is the first training that I have been to since I've been at Randall-Reilly Publishing that relates to something I use every day. That's a good thing. So far the class (through Global Knowledge) has been pretty good, which is to say that the instructor is knowledgable and isn't just a slide reader.
Atlanta is close to four hours away from my home, so it's going to be a long week (without the wife and kids)! Then next week, I'm going to be in Atlanta and Charlotte for two different projects. And in between, Alabama is going to get shallacked by Florida down in Gainesville. :(
Atlanta is close to four hours away from my home, so it's going to be a long week (without the wife and kids)! Then next week, I'm going to be in Atlanta and Charlotte for two different projects. And in between, Alabama is going to get shallacked by Florida down in Gainesville. :(
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Christian Carnival CXL is up
LJ is hosting the Christian Carnival this week over at Lux Venit. Y'all go give her a shout out.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
My Favorite Albums - Number 3
The Beatles (aka "The White Album") - The Beatles (1968)
As my favorite musical artists, it was easy to predict that the Beatles would make it on to my list of top ten albums, and they do. Twice. For the only artists to have sold over 1 billion records worldwide, this should come as no surprise. However, what is amazing is that hardly any of the Beatles' record 20 number one singles is even on an album. In the days that the Beatles recorded, singles and albums were purposefully kept separate. The catalog of Beatles songs is deep, well over 250 songs, and comprises 12 studio albums, an EP and nearly 30 singles, over a scant eight years from 1962-1970.
The arc of the Beatles' recording career follows three distinct phases. The musical styles are so vastly different in these three phases, that it is often amazing that you are listening to the same group. The first phase, from 1962's Please Please Me to 1964's Beatles For Sale is the poppy, lighthearted music, derivative in many ways from their diverse influences, such as Buddy Holly, Roy Orbison, Elvis Presley, Little Richard, Chuck Berry, and others. The second phase, beginning with 1965's Help and Rubber Soul, and continuing through 1966's Revolver, and 1967's Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band and Magical Mystery Tour, showed the influence of both drugs and Eastern philosophy, and revealed a growing musical depth as well as an amazing penchant for innovation.
By the time of The Beatles, the supergroup was moving into their third phase - the breakup. The band had devolved by this point to recording basically solo songs with the other Beatles as side men. Many of the compositions on this double album were written during the group's infamous "vacation" in India with the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, and the album is almost jarringly different than those of the previous year. Gone are the multiple session musicians and orchestral arrangements. Instead, the cuts run the gamut from hard rock ("Helter Skelter" and "Everybody's Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey") to acoustic guitar ballads ("Julia" and "Mother Nature's Son"). There is a lullaby ("Good Night"); a tongue-in-cheek homage to the Beach Boys ("Back in the USSR"); a pastiche of sound clips, backward loops and nonsense ("Revolution 9"); an unlisted "hidden" song (we'll call it "Can You Take me Back?"); a first-ever solo composition by Ringo ("Don't Pass Me By"), and an old-West saloon number ("Rocky Raccoon"). Eric Clapton even contributed an uncredited guitar solo on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." In all, there are 30 songs (31 if you count the unlisted track), in almost every style imaginable. Even the album cover, with its lack of any photo or even color, was a statement in sharp contrast to the bright, busy cover of Sgt. Pepper.
In a nutshell, the sheer diversity of the album is a large part of the reason I like it so much. You can listen through the over 90 minutes of running time and not run into two songs that sound alike. It is fascinating to me that John, Paul, George and Ringo had the ability to produce so much good music over so short a span of time, and the White Album showcases their broad range of musical gifts. It is definitely worth your time.
As my favorite musical artists, it was easy to predict that the Beatles would make it on to my list of top ten albums, and they do. Twice. For the only artists to have sold over 1 billion records worldwide, this should come as no surprise. However, what is amazing is that hardly any of the Beatles' record 20 number one singles is even on an album. In the days that the Beatles recorded, singles and albums were purposefully kept separate. The catalog of Beatles songs is deep, well over 250 songs, and comprises 12 studio albums, an EP and nearly 30 singles, over a scant eight years from 1962-1970.
The arc of the Beatles' recording career follows three distinct phases. The musical styles are so vastly different in these three phases, that it is often amazing that you are listening to the same group. The first phase, from 1962's Please Please Me to 1964's Beatles For Sale is the poppy, lighthearted music, derivative in many ways from their diverse influences, such as Buddy Holly, Roy Orbison, Elvis Presley, Little Richard, Chuck Berry, and others. The second phase, beginning with 1965's Help and Rubber Soul, and continuing through 1966's Revolver, and 1967's Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band and Magical Mystery Tour, showed the influence of both drugs and Eastern philosophy, and revealed a growing musical depth as well as an amazing penchant for innovation.
By the time of The Beatles, the supergroup was moving into their third phase - the breakup. The band had devolved by this point to recording basically solo songs with the other Beatles as side men. Many of the compositions on this double album were written during the group's infamous "vacation" in India with the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, and the album is almost jarringly different than those of the previous year. Gone are the multiple session musicians and orchestral arrangements. Instead, the cuts run the gamut from hard rock ("Helter Skelter" and "Everybody's Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey") to acoustic guitar ballads ("Julia" and "Mother Nature's Son"). There is a lullaby ("Good Night"); a tongue-in-cheek homage to the Beach Boys ("Back in the USSR"); a pastiche of sound clips, backward loops and nonsense ("Revolution 9"); an unlisted "hidden" song (we'll call it "Can You Take me Back?"); a first-ever solo composition by Ringo ("Don't Pass Me By"), and an old-West saloon number ("Rocky Raccoon"). Eric Clapton even contributed an uncredited guitar solo on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." In all, there are 30 songs (31 if you count the unlisted track), in almost every style imaginable. Even the album cover, with its lack of any photo or even color, was a statement in sharp contrast to the bright, busy cover of Sgt. Pepper.
In a nutshell, the sheer diversity of the album is a large part of the reason I like it so much. You can listen through the over 90 minutes of running time and not run into two songs that sound alike. It is fascinating to me that John, Paul, George and Ringo had the ability to produce so much good music over so short a span of time, and the White Album showcases their broad range of musical gifts. It is definitely worth your time.
The Church as Entertainment Media
I was in the Ham (that's Birmingham, for all you out-of-staters) today at a BellSouth conference for major customers. The keynote speaker was former FCC chairman Michael Powell (the son of the former SecState/CJCS/General Colin Powell). He gave an engaging and interesting speech, and I even got to ask a question afterwards, although I won't bore you with the details of that. However, there were some things he said that got me thinking.
Powell told a story about his 12-year-old son. He said he told his son that he needed to stop downloading pirated music and start using an online store like iTunes, because it was wrong to "steal" the music. His son responded, "That sucks! Music should be free!" like he was Che Guevera, fighting the Man, and he stormed off. Sometime later Powell got the cell phone bill, which included $35 worth of charges for ring tones that his son had downloaded. Powell asked his son "Che" why it was okay to pay $2.99 for 10 seconds of ringtone music, but not 99 cents for an actual full song. His son's comment was something along the lines of, "You just don't understand." However, Powell thought about it after a while and concluded that the reason that his son, and by extension others of the digital generation, didn't have a problem with this was that music is music, but ringtones are personal. They make a person's cell phone identifiably his, and not someone else's, and he doesn't have a problem spending money for them.
Powell went on to say that the children of the Information Age live in a world where entertainment content, catered to their personal desires, is available virtually on demand. Entertainment media like newspapers and television, that are designed based on a one-size-fits-all model, are failing because they cannot compete with immediately available, personally-tailored content.
This got me to thinking about the seeker-sensitive church movement. Pastors like Rick Warren preach a gospel that is about personal fulfillment and purpose, and their churches are designed to appeal to people who are curious about Christianity but don't want the "churchy" stuff. This is perfectly understandable. But is it right?
I have gone about as far as you possibly can over the last five years or so on this question. About five years ago, LJ and I were members of a relatively large "First Baptist"-type church. The church had six or seven full-time and part-time paid staff members, lots of wonderful people, a fantastic choir, and a well-developed and established children's program. The problem was, the church was effectively as dead as a doornail. Many people were attenders by habit or for appearance's sake. There were few people who were interested in studying the Word or sharing the gospel. When we participated in a sixteen-week visitation program to share the gospel with people who visited the church, we never visited one person who claimed to be unsaved. They were ALL members of other churches. That's not to say that all of them were Christians, but that obviously only people who claimed to be Christians were coming to this church.
That really started to bother me. I had realized that I was not concerned for those who were lost, and I had prayed that God would break my heart and give me a desire to see people come to Christ. When he answered my prayer, I started to become really dissatisfied with the church. At the same time, a couple who had been members there for many years had felt called to plant a church that would be focused on reaching the lost. They asked LJ and me to join them, and after some prayer and thought, we agreed.
The church plant, despite the best intentions, was probably doomed from the start. None of us had any experience planting a church, and almost everyone involved had small children, which meant that nearly all of our efforts had to be focused on ministering to our own kids rather than to those outside the church. What we also realized was that contemporary music and topical preaching, while refreshing for a time, was not very spiritually satisfying. Although we grew close in relationship to each other, we didn't reach very many new people before our plans and dreams fell apart.
Soon afterward, we joined an existing church that was contemporary, and seemed to be really growing. There were lots of young parents and small kids. The preaching was interesting and exciting. The pastor used visual aids and videos, and the music leader looked and sang like Justin Timberlake. It seemed to be a happening place. But after a while, we realized that many of the members there had come there specifically because of the pastor, who had worked at at least six other churches in town. The members were not all that interested in meeting the church's ministry needs, and LJ and I found ourselves running programs there with almost no willing helpers. After just 18 months, we decided to move on.
So now, we have been searching for a church home for more than a year. We have visited 20 different churches, and while we haven't made a decision yet, the place we have been attending lately is a very traditional church, about as far from the church plant we tried to start as is possible. Over the last few years, what LJ and I have been searching for in a church has changed dramatically, and we have come full circle (or at least I have - I'm not sure LJ was ever sold on it) on the seeker-sensitive mentality.
I wholeheartedly agree with Powell that our culture is teaching us that our desires can be met at the push of a button. We can receive voice and data communication 24 hours a day, seven days a week, at almost any place on the globe. We can meet our spouses and order our dinner online. We can shop for anything, anywhere, right from our home computer, and the only limit is how much credit you can convince some company to extend to you. In our consumer culture, is it any wonder that churches are conforming to the a la carte, on-demand model as well?
The problem is that CHURCHES ARE NOT BUSINESSES, and CHRISTIANITY IS NOT ENTERTAINMENT. In the business world, a company's success is based on bottom-line profitability. Many pastors and Christian leaders attempt to base the church's success on bottom-line member numbers. The best way to make those membership rolls grow is to cater to as many desires as possible, right? Meet people's "felt needs?" This is the worst possible solution. In Matthew 23:25, Jesus condemns the Pharisees for their greed and self-indulgence. Is it possible that he has changed his mind? "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me." (Luke 9:23 ESV) Is it possible that God's desire for us is not to gratify ourselves, but to glorify Him? How is it that we have gotten things so backwards?
Powell told a story about his 12-year-old son. He said he told his son that he needed to stop downloading pirated music and start using an online store like iTunes, because it was wrong to "steal" the music. His son responded, "That sucks! Music should be free!" like he was Che Guevera, fighting the Man, and he stormed off. Sometime later Powell got the cell phone bill, which included $35 worth of charges for ring tones that his son had downloaded. Powell asked his son "Che" why it was okay to pay $2.99 for 10 seconds of ringtone music, but not 99 cents for an actual full song. His son's comment was something along the lines of, "You just don't understand." However, Powell thought about it after a while and concluded that the reason that his son, and by extension others of the digital generation, didn't have a problem with this was that music is music, but ringtones are personal. They make a person's cell phone identifiably his, and not someone else's, and he doesn't have a problem spending money for them.
Powell went on to say that the children of the Information Age live in a world where entertainment content, catered to their personal desires, is available virtually on demand. Entertainment media like newspapers and television, that are designed based on a one-size-fits-all model, are failing because they cannot compete with immediately available, personally-tailored content.
This got me to thinking about the seeker-sensitive church movement. Pastors like Rick Warren preach a gospel that is about personal fulfillment and purpose, and their churches are designed to appeal to people who are curious about Christianity but don't want the "churchy" stuff. This is perfectly understandable. But is it right?
I have gone about as far as you possibly can over the last five years or so on this question. About five years ago, LJ and I were members of a relatively large "First Baptist"-type church. The church had six or seven full-time and part-time paid staff members, lots of wonderful people, a fantastic choir, and a well-developed and established children's program. The problem was, the church was effectively as dead as a doornail. Many people were attenders by habit or for appearance's sake. There were few people who were interested in studying the Word or sharing the gospel. When we participated in a sixteen-week visitation program to share the gospel with people who visited the church, we never visited one person who claimed to be unsaved. They were ALL members of other churches. That's not to say that all of them were Christians, but that obviously only people who claimed to be Christians were coming to this church.
That really started to bother me. I had realized that I was not concerned for those who were lost, and I had prayed that God would break my heart and give me a desire to see people come to Christ. When he answered my prayer, I started to become really dissatisfied with the church. At the same time, a couple who had been members there for many years had felt called to plant a church that would be focused on reaching the lost. They asked LJ and me to join them, and after some prayer and thought, we agreed.
The church plant, despite the best intentions, was probably doomed from the start. None of us had any experience planting a church, and almost everyone involved had small children, which meant that nearly all of our efforts had to be focused on ministering to our own kids rather than to those outside the church. What we also realized was that contemporary music and topical preaching, while refreshing for a time, was not very spiritually satisfying. Although we grew close in relationship to each other, we didn't reach very many new people before our plans and dreams fell apart.
Soon afterward, we joined an existing church that was contemporary, and seemed to be really growing. There were lots of young parents and small kids. The preaching was interesting and exciting. The pastor used visual aids and videos, and the music leader looked and sang like Justin Timberlake. It seemed to be a happening place. But after a while, we realized that many of the members there had come there specifically because of the pastor, who had worked at at least six other churches in town. The members were not all that interested in meeting the church's ministry needs, and LJ and I found ourselves running programs there with almost no willing helpers. After just 18 months, we decided to move on.
So now, we have been searching for a church home for more than a year. We have visited 20 different churches, and while we haven't made a decision yet, the place we have been attending lately is a very traditional church, about as far from the church plant we tried to start as is possible. Over the last few years, what LJ and I have been searching for in a church has changed dramatically, and we have come full circle (or at least I have - I'm not sure LJ was ever sold on it) on the seeker-sensitive mentality.
I wholeheartedly agree with Powell that our culture is teaching us that our desires can be met at the push of a button. We can receive voice and data communication 24 hours a day, seven days a week, at almost any place on the globe. We can meet our spouses and order our dinner online. We can shop for anything, anywhere, right from our home computer, and the only limit is how much credit you can convince some company to extend to you. In our consumer culture, is it any wonder that churches are conforming to the a la carte, on-demand model as well?
The problem is that CHURCHES ARE NOT BUSINESSES, and CHRISTIANITY IS NOT ENTERTAINMENT. In the business world, a company's success is based on bottom-line profitability. Many pastors and Christian leaders attempt to base the church's success on bottom-line member numbers. The best way to make those membership rolls grow is to cater to as many desires as possible, right? Meet people's "felt needs?" This is the worst possible solution. In Matthew 23:25, Jesus condemns the Pharisees for their greed and self-indulgence. Is it possible that he has changed his mind? "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me." (Luke 9:23 ESV) Is it possible that God's desire for us is not to gratify ourselves, but to glorify Him? How is it that we have gotten things so backwards?
Monday, September 18, 2006
My Favorite Albums - Number 4
From the Cradle - Eric Clapton (1994)
Eric Clapton's career has followed a long and winding road. From his start with the Yardbirds in 1963 at the tender age of 18, the guitarist went through several bands and reinventions (John Mayall's Bluesbreakers, Cream, Blind Faith, Delaney and Bonnie and Friends, and Derek and the Dominos) before striking out as a solo act in the early seventies. Through his entire career, though he explored pop, reggae, rock, jazz, soul, and country, the music that has most influenced and defined him is the blues. Clapton, and others of like mind, have introduced many to music that they would not have otherwise heard, all while pointing back to the originators, like Muddy Waters, Robert Johnson, Howlin' Wolf, Willie Dixon and Elmore James to name a few as their biggest influences.
Although it may to difficult to believe now, Eric Clapton was thought to have reached the nadir of his creative career in the mid 1980s. While he continued to have commercial success with two Phil Collins-produced albums, he was struggling with alcoholism, and his guitar-playing seemed to be relegated to almost an afterthought. But by the early nineties, Clapton had not only returned to his guitar-hero roots, but achieved amazing success, first with his "comeback" album Journeyman (1989), and then with his 1992 MTV Unplugged appearance, which garnered him six Grammies, as well as his first and only number one song "Tears in Heaven," dedicated to his four-year-old son who died in a freak accident in 1991. By the time that 1994 rolled around, Clapton was on top of the world commercially, and he set out to pay homage to his influences by recording an album consisting entirely of blues covers.
From the Cradle finally served to throw off the over-produced polish that had characterized most of his music from the eighties. The album was recorded live in the studio, with no overdubs, and with Clapton obviously singing and playing his heart out. For those critics that speculated that Clapton could no longer play as he once had, "Five Long Years" alone would put that to rest. It features a biting lyric ("I worked five long years for one woman/She had the nerve to put me out") and incendiary guitar work. Other standouts include "Tore Down," "Someday After A While," and "Groaning the Blues." Clapton is here at the top of his form.
The best-selling blues album of all time, some critics carp that From the Cradle is nothing more than a collection of inferior versions of the originals, but those critics would be missing the point. Clapton isn't trying to outdo the original blues artists, or to somehow improve on their legacy. He is paying tribute to them, and turning in my favorite album of his to date.
Eric Clapton's career has followed a long and winding road. From his start with the Yardbirds in 1963 at the tender age of 18, the guitarist went through several bands and reinventions (John Mayall's Bluesbreakers, Cream, Blind Faith, Delaney and Bonnie and Friends, and Derek and the Dominos) before striking out as a solo act in the early seventies. Through his entire career, though he explored pop, reggae, rock, jazz, soul, and country, the music that has most influenced and defined him is the blues. Clapton, and others of like mind, have introduced many to music that they would not have otherwise heard, all while pointing back to the originators, like Muddy Waters, Robert Johnson, Howlin' Wolf, Willie Dixon and Elmore James to name a few as their biggest influences.
Although it may to difficult to believe now, Eric Clapton was thought to have reached the nadir of his creative career in the mid 1980s. While he continued to have commercial success with two Phil Collins-produced albums, he was struggling with alcoholism, and his guitar-playing seemed to be relegated to almost an afterthought. But by the early nineties, Clapton had not only returned to his guitar-hero roots, but achieved amazing success, first with his "comeback" album Journeyman (1989), and then with his 1992 MTV Unplugged appearance, which garnered him six Grammies, as well as his first and only number one song "Tears in Heaven," dedicated to his four-year-old son who died in a freak accident in 1991. By the time that 1994 rolled around, Clapton was on top of the world commercially, and he set out to pay homage to his influences by recording an album consisting entirely of blues covers.
From the Cradle finally served to throw off the over-produced polish that had characterized most of his music from the eighties. The album was recorded live in the studio, with no overdubs, and with Clapton obviously singing and playing his heart out. For those critics that speculated that Clapton could no longer play as he once had, "Five Long Years" alone would put that to rest. It features a biting lyric ("I worked five long years for one woman/She had the nerve to put me out") and incendiary guitar work. Other standouts include "Tore Down," "Someday After A While," and "Groaning the Blues." Clapton is here at the top of his form.
The best-selling blues album of all time, some critics carp that From the Cradle is nothing more than a collection of inferior versions of the originals, but those critics would be missing the point. Clapton isn't trying to outdo the original blues artists, or to somehow improve on their legacy. He is paying tribute to them, and turning in my favorite album of his to date.
Friday, September 15, 2006
Flying high
LJ's uncle John is a pilot for the police department. This afternoon after I got home from work, we took the kids over to the airport and we all got to take turns flying in the helicopter with John. Well, actually the kids mostly just hovered around the hanger with him, but he took LJ and me on separate trips around the city. It was pretty cool. This would be a good time to show you a cool picture from today, but we left the camera at my parents' house this weekend, so we got video but no snaps.
Anyway, we arrived at the hanger while John was at lunch, so we went with the kids over to the airport park and the kids swinged (swang?) for a while. As John drove past the park in the police truck, we saw us and turned the lights and sirens on to let us know he was back. We then walked over to the hanger and the kids all got in one of the helicopters that was parked there and pretended to fly it, flipping switches and pulling the triggers (the helicopters are all Vietnam-era Army surplus Hueys, and were once armed). Abs pushed a button and the engine tried to start. She scared herself (and us) and removed her finger quickly from the button. After that NoahKrakatoa made sure that she didn't touch it again (he said later that he "fweaked out"). After they played in the helicopter a little bit, we went outside, where John preflighted the helicopter outside and showed me how to strap everyone in and gave me instructions for how to bring the kids back and forth to him.
First up was NoahKrakatoa. I walked out to the helicopter with him and strapped him in, put on the headset, and plugged him in so he could hear John. Then I walked back and John started the engine. Noah looked unsure, very clenched up, and LJ commented to me that out of all the kids, Noah is the one most afraid of heights. I guess I should say that this particular Huey had the front doors removed, so there's nothing between you and the ground other than your seatbelts. Anyway, John brought the engine up slowly and Noah gained confidence, so that when he took off, Noah waved to us. John took him up from the pad and hovered backwards toward the grass between the hanger and Runway 29. Then he turned and hovered around back and forth for a few minutes and brought him back. BenjiBoy went next, then HannahBanana. When I came to get HannahBanana out, I asked John if Abs would be able to go. He wasn't sure how she would do, and he asked what she said. I told him that she wanted to go (she had asked to every time the others went), so he said that we'd give it a try. So Abs strapped in and went and she liked it a lot. Then LJ got her turn, which was probably 10 minutes of flying, and then finally was my turn.
I'm a big, tall guy (we'll leave it at that), so my biggest problem was that the flight controls had to make it past and around my legs. This meant that I had to sit in sort of a cramped position so that the collective and cyclic could make it past my left leg while I made sure that I didn't touch the pedals with my feet (there are live controls on both front seats). This made it a little bit nervewracking, since I felt like I might block a critical movement by accident, but John did a great job. This was the first time any of us had been up in a helicopter, and it was interesting to contrast it with airplane flight. I have been up many times in airliners, and I have flown in a Cessna and an "experimental" kit plane. Flying in the helicopter was much different.
For one, the takeoff and landing was much easier than going up in a plane. Although you feel the power of takeoff, it was a much more gradual transition than in a plane. Landing was much softer as well, and since you are at zero air speed at both times, it feels less dangerous, although I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. But it isn't as scary. In the air, it's a little bit different, although, granted, that could have been because I was totally exposed to the outside, my arm was out the door, and I could look straight down to the ground. But the sensation of flight was different too. I am pretty sure we were going slow enough that we would have been at the lower end of the flight envelope for even a small plane, so you really felt the rises and falls caused by wind, even though it was not windy at all today. I would hate to be in a helicopter in a bad storm (I have been in a plane in a bad one). Somehow the forward momentum of flight in a plane gives me a sensation that even if we hit an up or down draft that we will still be flying forward and that we'll be okay. I could imagine the helicopter getting tossed around quite a bit, although I'm sure John could have taken the speed up significantly had that been necessary. It was neat to see the city from above with the ability to really focus and identify things as you leisurely circle around.
So all in all, it was a lot of fun. Once I got back, NoahKrakatoa was ready to go again, but we will have to save the next ride for later. BenjiBoy and I were talking about it after we got home, and I told him that he got to do something today that billions of people will never have a chance to do. I'm not even sure that I even know anyone else who's ever ridden in a chopper, except for John's family. Cool stuff.
Anyway, we arrived at the hanger while John was at lunch, so we went with the kids over to the airport park and the kids swinged (swang?) for a while. As John drove past the park in the police truck, we saw us and turned the lights and sirens on to let us know he was back. We then walked over to the hanger and the kids all got in one of the helicopters that was parked there and pretended to fly it, flipping switches and pulling the triggers (the helicopters are all Vietnam-era Army surplus Hueys, and were once armed). Abs pushed a button and the engine tried to start. She scared herself (and us) and removed her finger quickly from the button. After that NoahKrakatoa made sure that she didn't touch it again (he said later that he "fweaked out"). After they played in the helicopter a little bit, we went outside, where John preflighted the helicopter outside and showed me how to strap everyone in and gave me instructions for how to bring the kids back and forth to him.
First up was NoahKrakatoa. I walked out to the helicopter with him and strapped him in, put on the headset, and plugged him in so he could hear John. Then I walked back and John started the engine. Noah looked unsure, very clenched up, and LJ commented to me that out of all the kids, Noah is the one most afraid of heights. I guess I should say that this particular Huey had the front doors removed, so there's nothing between you and the ground other than your seatbelts. Anyway, John brought the engine up slowly and Noah gained confidence, so that when he took off, Noah waved to us. John took him up from the pad and hovered backwards toward the grass between the hanger and Runway 29. Then he turned and hovered around back and forth for a few minutes and brought him back. BenjiBoy went next, then HannahBanana. When I came to get HannahBanana out, I asked John if Abs would be able to go. He wasn't sure how she would do, and he asked what she said. I told him that she wanted to go (she had asked to every time the others went), so he said that we'd give it a try. So Abs strapped in and went and she liked it a lot. Then LJ got her turn, which was probably 10 minutes of flying, and then finally was my turn.
I'm a big, tall guy (we'll leave it at that), so my biggest problem was that the flight controls had to make it past and around my legs. This meant that I had to sit in sort of a cramped position so that the collective and cyclic could make it past my left leg while I made sure that I didn't touch the pedals with my feet (there are live controls on both front seats). This made it a little bit nervewracking, since I felt like I might block a critical movement by accident, but John did a great job. This was the first time any of us had been up in a helicopter, and it was interesting to contrast it with airplane flight. I have been up many times in airliners, and I have flown in a Cessna and an "experimental" kit plane. Flying in the helicopter was much different.
For one, the takeoff and landing was much easier than going up in a plane. Although you feel the power of takeoff, it was a much more gradual transition than in a plane. Landing was much softer as well, and since you are at zero air speed at both times, it feels less dangerous, although I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. But it isn't as scary. In the air, it's a little bit different, although, granted, that could have been because I was totally exposed to the outside, my arm was out the door, and I could look straight down to the ground. But the sensation of flight was different too. I am pretty sure we were going slow enough that we would have been at the lower end of the flight envelope for even a small plane, so you really felt the rises and falls caused by wind, even though it was not windy at all today. I would hate to be in a helicopter in a bad storm (I have been in a plane in a bad one). Somehow the forward momentum of flight in a plane gives me a sensation that even if we hit an up or down draft that we will still be flying forward and that we'll be okay. I could imagine the helicopter getting tossed around quite a bit, although I'm sure John could have taken the speed up significantly had that been necessary. It was neat to see the city from above with the ability to really focus and identify things as you leisurely circle around.
So all in all, it was a lot of fun. Once I got back, NoahKrakatoa was ready to go again, but we will have to save the next ride for later. BenjiBoy and I were talking about it after we got home, and I told him that he got to do something today that billions of people will never have a chance to do. I'm not even sure that I even know anyone else who's ever ridden in a chopper, except for John's family. Cool stuff.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Total War
I am just looking over the headlines on Drudge, and man, are we living in scary times. Just a couple of examples:
So it's obvious that while terrorists and the states that support them are still hard at work on their plan to destroy our country and our way of life, the liberal moonbats are hard at work blaming the Bush administration for all the evils in the world. The dichotomy is breathtaking.
I realize that Christians of good faith can hold differing political views. I try hard not to look upon Christians with socially liberal viewpoints as apostates, and there are certainly a lot of things that are distasteful to me about the Bush presidency (although probably not the same things that liberal Democrats have against it). However, this irrational hatred of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, et al, is starting to become psychopathic. It's amazing to me that people are so blinded by their politics that they cannot see that there is an enemy out there who would just as soon see both sides lying dead in a pool of their own blood. I was heartened after the September 11th attacks to see both sides of the political spectrum come together symbolically to stand against terrorism, but I feared that it would be short-lived. I had no idea it would be like this.
I disagree with the way that the administration has prosecuted the war in both Afghanistan and Iraq, although interestingly enough, the war-fighting part of both wars was initially incredibly successful. Unfortunately, we seem to have become so concerned with convincing everyone that we don't want to stay any longer than we have to that we have relinquished the initiative, and most of the territory, to the enemy. I am a bit of a history buff, and I have just finished Shelby Foote's three-volume, 3000+ page history of the Civil War. As a Southerner, I will be committing a little bit of a sacrilege here, but for the sake of argument, let's compare the South to the Islamist fanatics we are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Southerners had fewer resources, less people, less land, and less weapons than the North. They had nothing going for them but a fanatical belief in the justice of their cause and their personal honor. However, for a good part of the war, almost every battle was won by the South, and if things had gone slightly differently at Gettysburg, the South could possibly have forced an end to the war.
What are the parallels? Like the anti-war crowd today, there were many in the North who weren't interested in fighting to keep the South in the Union. They frankly didn't think that the Southern states were worth the effort. Many went into the war thinking that it would be over in a matter of months - as a matter of fact, many of the first enlistments only lasted three months, and thousands of Union soldiers left the army without having fought at all. There were many in the North who wanted nothing to do with fighting a war over slavery, thinking that the slaves weren't worth risking white men's blood to free. And of course, there were those who were enthusiastic at first, but who became tired of the seemingly relentless conflict.
So what can we learn from the North's successful prosecution of the war? It is a little-known fact that only one major battle in the Civil War was fought on Union soil, again similar to the current war. When the Union moved over Southern territory, total war was waged. Crops were eaten or burned, houses were burned down, livestock was slaughtered, factories were destroyed, railroads demolished. The ability to live on the land was removed, and the Confederate Army was slowly beaten down by hunger, lack of clothing, and shear hopelessness.
Now one might argue that the battle to win hearts and minds would be forever lost if we decided to wage total war on our enemies with overwhelming force. However, I would contend that we never had much chance to win the hearts and minds of most of the inhabitants of Iraq and Afghanistan. They mistrust our motives, they have varying degrees of affinity with our enemies, and they have a long history of animosity toward the West in general and the U.S. in particular. Also, the bungling, ineffective way in which we have managed the post-war situation has created less confidence in our eventual success than there was before we started.
Now I'm not advocating burning down Baghdad. What I am suggesting though, is that the so-called "Bush Doctrine" should be completely implemented. The countries should be smothered with American troops. Weapons smugglers coming from Iran and Syria should be bombed, and strategic targets in Iran and Syria bombed as well, if efforts aren't made to cooperate. Terrorist/insurgent fighters should be tried quickly and executed. The Iraqi police should be brought under control and tried for crimes that they commit. The countries should be blockaded to the best of our ability. And leaders that foment unrest, even if they are members of the "government" (I'm talking about you, Muqtada al-Sadr) should be apprehended and imprisoned if possible, and killed if not.
Winning the U.S. Civil War was not about wiping out the hatred of the typical Southerner for the Yankees (some would argue that it still exists). It finally boiled down to Grant's determination to removing the South's will to fight, and accepting nothing less than "unconditional surrender." That was done by removing all hope the Confederacy had of winning. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that the terrorists have figured out that, if our strategy doesn't change, they only need to hold on until Election Day, November 2008 for victory.
"Iran still refusing to halt enrichment"
"Bush Assassination movie coming to U.S. theaters"
"Syria foils American embassy attack"
"Oliver Stone hints at film tackling 9/11 'conspiracy'"
So it's obvious that while terrorists and the states that support them are still hard at work on their plan to destroy our country and our way of life, the liberal moonbats are hard at work blaming the Bush administration for all the evils in the world. The dichotomy is breathtaking.
I realize that Christians of good faith can hold differing political views. I try hard not to look upon Christians with socially liberal viewpoints as apostates, and there are certainly a lot of things that are distasteful to me about the Bush presidency (although probably not the same things that liberal Democrats have against it). However, this irrational hatred of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, et al, is starting to become psychopathic. It's amazing to me that people are so blinded by their politics that they cannot see that there is an enemy out there who would just as soon see both sides lying dead in a pool of their own blood. I was heartened after the September 11th attacks to see both sides of the political spectrum come together symbolically to stand against terrorism, but I feared that it would be short-lived. I had no idea it would be like this.
I disagree with the way that the administration has prosecuted the war in both Afghanistan and Iraq, although interestingly enough, the war-fighting part of both wars was initially incredibly successful. Unfortunately, we seem to have become so concerned with convincing everyone that we don't want to stay any longer than we have to that we have relinquished the initiative, and most of the territory, to the enemy. I am a bit of a history buff, and I have just finished Shelby Foote's three-volume, 3000+ page history of the Civil War. As a Southerner, I will be committing a little bit of a sacrilege here, but for the sake of argument, let's compare the South to the Islamist fanatics we are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Southerners had fewer resources, less people, less land, and less weapons than the North. They had nothing going for them but a fanatical belief in the justice of their cause and their personal honor. However, for a good part of the war, almost every battle was won by the South, and if things had gone slightly differently at Gettysburg, the South could possibly have forced an end to the war.
What are the parallels? Like the anti-war crowd today, there were many in the North who weren't interested in fighting to keep the South in the Union. They frankly didn't think that the Southern states were worth the effort. Many went into the war thinking that it would be over in a matter of months - as a matter of fact, many of the first enlistments only lasted three months, and thousands of Union soldiers left the army without having fought at all. There were many in the North who wanted nothing to do with fighting a war over slavery, thinking that the slaves weren't worth risking white men's blood to free. And of course, there were those who were enthusiastic at first, but who became tired of the seemingly relentless conflict.
So what can we learn from the North's successful prosecution of the war? It is a little-known fact that only one major battle in the Civil War was fought on Union soil, again similar to the current war. When the Union moved over Southern territory, total war was waged. Crops were eaten or burned, houses were burned down, livestock was slaughtered, factories were destroyed, railroads demolished. The ability to live on the land was removed, and the Confederate Army was slowly beaten down by hunger, lack of clothing, and shear hopelessness.
Now one might argue that the battle to win hearts and minds would be forever lost if we decided to wage total war on our enemies with overwhelming force. However, I would contend that we never had much chance to win the hearts and minds of most of the inhabitants of Iraq and Afghanistan. They mistrust our motives, they have varying degrees of affinity with our enemies, and they have a long history of animosity toward the West in general and the U.S. in particular. Also, the bungling, ineffective way in which we have managed the post-war situation has created less confidence in our eventual success than there was before we started.
Now I'm not advocating burning down Baghdad. What I am suggesting though, is that the so-called "Bush Doctrine" should be completely implemented. The countries should be smothered with American troops. Weapons smugglers coming from Iran and Syria should be bombed, and strategic targets in Iran and Syria bombed as well, if efforts aren't made to cooperate. Terrorist/insurgent fighters should be tried quickly and executed. The Iraqi police should be brought under control and tried for crimes that they commit. The countries should be blockaded to the best of our ability. And leaders that foment unrest, even if they are members of the "government" (I'm talking about you, Muqtada al-Sadr) should be apprehended and imprisoned if possible, and killed if not.
Winning the U.S. Civil War was not about wiping out the hatred of the typical Southerner for the Yankees (some would argue that it still exists). It finally boiled down to Grant's determination to removing the South's will to fight, and accepting nothing less than "unconditional surrender." That was done by removing all hope the Confederacy had of winning. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that the terrorists have figured out that, if our strategy doesn't change, they only need to hold on until Election Day, November 2008 for victory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)