Tax Issues
I worked through my taxes yesterday using TurboTax (Deluxe for Mac). But I hit a problem along the way. Below is my Customer Service inquiry at TT's website (submitted via a web-form).

After completing my federal return without trouble, I completed my state (NC) return.

I lived in NC from 1.05 through 6.05, and in TX from 7.05 through 12.05. Less than half of my gross income was made while I lived in NC.

Going through the NC return, the initial calculation on my taxes due was $[BigNumber]. I figured that this was because TT thought all my income accrued in NC. Sure enough, when it asked for the time frames for my income, and I entered the appropriate times for each W-2, my tax liability changed from $[BigNumber] to -$[SmallNumber]. (of course, this made me happy!)

At the time to efile, TT ran its error check and returned an error in my NC return.

The error: Line 7 on form D-422 was blank. To fix the error, TT asked me to enter a value.

Opening up "forms," it seemed to me that Line 7 of D-422 referenced lines 14 & 15 on D-400. So I made the calculations requested by Line7 (D-422) of Lines14&15 (D-400), and entered the difference in Line7 (D-422).

After completing this fix of the error, TT re-ran the error check function and declared an error free NC return. There was no indication that anything else had changed in my NC return, nor was there TT's normal, "you ought to recalculate your tax now" warning.

I clicked through the next steps to efile and waited for TT to transmit my Federal & NC returns.

As they were transmitted, the "Federal Tax Due" & "NC Tax Due" boxes refreshed. The Federal Tax Due stayed the same. (As it turns out, the Federal Government owes me money.) But when the NC Tax Due flashed up, it had reverted to a tax liability of $[BigNumber]. This was the same number that TT calculated before I'd indiated that less than half of my income was made in NC.

As this was revealed to me while the return was being submitted, there wasn't anything for me to do but cringe.

Once the returns were away, I re-printed my tax returns (I'd printed them before the error was found) and looking through the NC return, I see that on line48 of D-400, the "Income while a resident of NC" is absolutely wrong, and doesn't take into account that we only lived there half a year.

I looked through your FAQ and couldn't find instructions on what to do when one has efiled an incorrect state (NC) return. Is this an amended return situation?

Also, since I went through your step-by-step NC return process and couldn't fix this mis-calculation, I need some help to know what to do here. Despite my best efforts, is this a user error? Or is this a known issue that you're working on a patch for, and should I wait for such a thing? Or do I need to calculate my NC return by hand?

This is my 7th year using TT to file my taxes. I have never had any problems with TT and up to this point have been very pleased with your product. I almost did my taxes by hand, though, this year because needing to file NC income tax while only living there for 6 months seemed like a more complicated algorithm with more potential for TT failure. But then I figured that if you guys can figure out the Federal tax code, you can probably figure out anything, so I gave it a shot again this year.

I look forward to your suggestion for a resolution of this issue, and eagerly await your response.

If you'd like to follow my progress in resolving this issue, you may track it at my blog: http://paulstokes.blogspot.com

The website says I should hear back from them in 24 hours. I suspect that the first pingback will be a "We got your inquiry" automatic response. I thought I'd follow this interaction online since many Stokes Kith&Kin use TT & would be interested.

And while we're on the subject of taxes, what is up with the AMT (Alternate Minimum Tax)? When TT said that since my return was larger than the AMT, I wouldn't have to pay the AMT. I didn't quite know what to think of this, since the "M" stood for "minimum". If the AMT was smaller, shouldn't I be paying that, instead?

Then I saw the Journal's Saturday Editorial on the AMT. Their comment is that it should be called the Mandatory Maximum Tax, as it's not an option about whether you pay it, and the question isn't about you paying something less, it's about you paying whatever is higher. Wha? The older I get, and the more folks depend upon the income that I can generate (Kellsey, Aidan, for now), the more angry I get about income tax, and the less excited I am about my government giving money to folks who for whatever reason have not worked to earn said money. I know, some folks really do need it. I also know that there's neither an easy nor straightforward way to solve the problem. But it still really bugs me.

"Be Smarter at Work, Slack Off." Carol found this article from Fortune Magazine. It challenges the idea of multi-tasking being the mark of creativity and genius. This quote from Peter Drucker describes the problem that I have faced since entering the legal profession:

"To be effective, every knowledge worker, and especially every executive . . . needs to dispose of time in fairly large chunks. To have small dribs and drabs of time at his disposal will not be sufficient even if the total is an impressive number of hours."

I keep a daily time record so that I know at the end of the day how much time I spend on each matter. Sometimes there are over 25 entries! And most of them are occasioned by interruptions of one sort of another. By the end of the day, when I ask myself what really have I accomplished, other than keeping a good time record, I don't like my answer. You would think that after 35+ years of trying to deal with this problem, I would have solved it. But it is a daily struggle.

My observaton is that many lawyers spend long hours in the office because they have to look busy and account for a certain number of billable hours during the regular work day. After the work day is over, they simply extend the stay at the office so that they can have some uninterrupted time to think. The clients get billed on the basis of those work-day "dribs and drabs" that the lawyer records on the file, but the real value being added occurs when the staff goes home, the phone stops ringing, and the office gets quiet. The difficulty is that when the lawyer has a family waiting for him at home, he must limit the amount of time at the office he would otherwise extend into the evening.

Last night we watched two documentaries on the the life of Billy Graham. They were both complimentary. One had David Frost as the narrator, and was largely focused on Graham's international work. The other had Walter Cronkite as the narrator, and it focused on Graham's relationship to his wife and to his family. What struck me was the huge chunks of time that Graham spent away from his family, literally months and months. When his children were very small, they didn't even remember who he was when he would come home. But those times away that Graham had, surrounded by a competent team, with the mission clearly defined, provided the basis of Graham's great success. I don't mean to suggest that the success was not enabled by the Holy Spirit, but that enabling probably occurred in ways that are consistent with the managment principle that Drucker refers to. (And clearly God poured his grace out on the family back home, and Ruth Bell Graham was a giant in her own right.) I also don't mean that family should be forsaken, and that fathers do not have a responsibility to attend to the daily needs of their wives and chldren. Graham, after all, is a figure who arises once every generation or two. But his life is instructive.

Some of us will, in fact, "go home" and leave the office. But the home itself, as it has been transformed into an entertainment center, is a place where wholesome "chunks of time" get diced into "dribs and drabs" as we hop around the internet, pop in the latest DVD from NetFlx, pick up and put down magazines and catalogs, and keep the house constantly full of music of one sort or another.

Even the contemporary worship service has become busy and "entertaining". We want to have good pace during the service; we don't want to linger too long with any one module; we don't want the line to go dead with spaces of quiet - someone may get bored; and, besides that, why aren't you up there in the choir with that voice with which God has gifted you? Why aren't you "serving"? The service is, after all, for the "seeker", as if I, having "accepted Jesus Christ as my Saviour and Lord", have found all the God I really need.

Happy Easter!

Now this is interesting, I'm sure. Went to WW yesterday, as I have been doing since October, trying to get back to "maintenance", which is 155 pounds. Attending WW, I went from about 182 to 155 during the period from late 2004 to early 2005 and became a "lifetime member". Then I fell off the wagon and gained 10 back. I had spent over $350 in altering my business suits when I initially lost the weight, and then I reached the point where I could only wear two or three of those suits. I didn't want to spend the money with more alterations. And I hated to think that I had lost control of a part of my life that I could control (There aren't a lot of others you can control, you know.)

So last fall it was back to every week of WW, usually the only guy there (which is not all bad). Yesterday I weighed in at 158.5! Only 1.5 pounds to go and I'm into the "maintenance range", which is 2 pounds above and 2 pounds below "maintenance". When one is in the range, one does not have to pay to attend WW.

Loosing and keeping off weight, once you have passed a certain age, is very, very difficult. Every where I turn, there is food. At every social function and in the place in my house where I spend most of my waking time, the kitchen. And if its hard for me, a male type, my observations of the women at WW is that it is doubly hard for them.

This may be hypothetical right now for the generation of K&K below Carol and me, for whom their metabolism is a friend and not an enemy, but I assure you, the time will come when your body just won't burn up as many calories every day. It would not be a bad idea to work on good dietary habits now, so you will not have to make a radical change later.

One really sad thing that I observe these days is that not only are adults of all ages overweight in ever increasing numbers, but children are overweight in large numbers as well, as they never were when I was growing up and when our children were growing up.

WW has my hearty endorsement. It has a simple formula, less calories consumed, less weight added. More calories, more weight. You learn easy ways to evaluate the calory worth of foods you might consider eating and to keep track of those calories. Its about "portion control", mostly, and not swearing off altogether things you like to eat.

Bear Story. As someone who cannot think of a better place to be than in the Great Smokey Mountain National Park with his family, this post on Instapundit got my attention.

Sorry, Carol and Mary! From the lead article in today's WSJ concerning Mills Corp., the owner/developer of Sawgrass Mills:

[Mills Corp.'s] recent developments have largely been flops. One in five employees has left or been laid off, including its development director, raising doubts about whether it can finish the projects it hasn't already abandoned. Last month, the Securities and Exchange Commission launched an investigation into its accounting practices. Its stock has plummeted 55% the past eight months. On Wednesday, its lenders forced it to slash dividend payouts and to submit to biweekly financial reports while it readies itself for a likely sale.

However, Sawgrass Mills itself is a very healthy piece of the Mills Corp. empire, reasuringly reports the WSJ.

Bye-Bye, OPEC? Here's an optimistic view of our energy future. Subtract Middle East Oil from the energy equation and ask whether we would be in Iraq. I am not saying we should not be in Iraq, but clearly its about what we perceive to be our economic best interests. Last week, the WSJ has a front page article on the Canadian oil sands, equally optimistic, it seems to me. Buy ExxonMobil and buy Total, the French oil company.

Justification of the Genre
So I haven't been that big of a fan of mashups. (The practice of putting two songs together, essentially playing them together at the same time to create a unique third song.) Not that I don't think the theory's cool, or that the folks who do it are talented. I think it's a fun concept and takes skill to make the pitches & meteres match. They just didn't do anything for me. You like chocolate, I like vanilla: that's cool.

But then, Sean points out a mashup of "Video Killed the Radio Star" and "Chariots of Fire." And now I believe. At least for this one song, I am a fan!

1000 Spoons is the mashup genius behind it. You can listen here.

Clash of Civilizations. The WSJ reports today that "Miss Iraq went into hiding shortly after being crowned, fearing she'll be targeted by insurgents. Her predecessor quit following death threats."

Con Game. In a previous post, I linked to a British newspaper's account of new police regulations which give a policeman the discretion to allow a burglar to go free without a court hearing, much less a trial and sentencing. It appears from the article that a major reason for the policy is the expense to the government of incarcerating criminals.

In the United States, incarcerating criminals is similarly expensive. (The statistics on what we spend on prisoners per year, as compared to what we spend on educating our children, are simply shocking). But we seem to have the means and the will to undertake that expense. As a result, we have one of the highest prison populations in the world, if not the highest. There is a good bit of criticism, usually from the left, about that distinction, but one must admit that having fewer criminals on the street makes life much easier for the rest of us.

On the other hand, this article from the current issue of Forbes has a sensible criticism, it seems to me, of our prison system, and some good ideas to reform it. The author proceeds on the assumption that rehabilitative efforts, reasonably made, can have a positive effect on prison populations. (My sense is that many conservative commentators have decided that "rehabilitation" is an absurd and unreachable objective.) Greater Miami Youth for Christ has a very active prison ministry among teenagers, and from what I have been able to learn of the ministry, it has had some significant success in helping young people turn away from their paths of self-destruction.

It seems to me that Christians who seek to leaven a culture like ours, a culture full of so many corrosive ideas being promoted by a relentless media, ideas that enable and encourage people to make bad decisions, should not support a policy of simply building more prisons, but demand that something intelligent be done with the people in the prisons while we have them there.

As I have thought about that article from Britain, I had a couple of other thoughts.

One of them is that civilized countries have always had a problem with dealing with its criminals and with the expense of building prisons and maintaining prisoners in them. One way to deal with the problem was simply to execute convicts for all sorts of crimes. Another, if you were English, was to put the prisoners in obsolete ships sitting in the Thames, or to send the prisoners to the American Colonies and to Australia. It is interesting that somehow those convicts in America and Australia managed to be socialized suffiently to build new societies.

Another thought is that, finally, we may see the English rearm themselves. Right now, they have some exceedingly strict gun control laws. For example, if you shoot or otherwise harm a burglar in the act of pillaging your home, you will be prosecuted. This has to change, it seems to me. And we may see it in our lifetimes.

Quick, Let's Move to England. These people beat Rommel?

A Constructive Weekend

UPDATED: 4.11.06 - pictures of the finished product!

This past weekend Aidan, Doug, Sue, Kells, Walter & I put together a super-de-dooper playground in the back of Doug & Sue's house. Perhaps the news of an upcoming 5th grandson (Justin & Kristen's 3rd boy) prompted it. Perhaps the first lovely Spring day in Austin prompted it. Regardless of the reason, we spent the better part of the weekend assembling the 1000 piece puzzle.

Aidan, of course, was a big help every step of the way.

Below, you can see him inspecting one of the boxes.


It's very important to give your slides a dry-run before actually installing them.


He's not afraid to get his hands dirty in actual assembly work.



But he mostly focused on supervision.


"Bob Vila, you've got nothin' on me!"


Putting up the "Swing Set" part of this "Playscape".


Enjoying the view!

On the latest "Gospel"
The best/most enlightening commentary I've found so far:

Suppose that sometime around the year 3,800 A.D., someone wrote a newspaper that began: "According to a recently-discovered document, which appears to have been written sometime before 1926, Benedict Arnold did not attempt to betray George Washington and the American cause, as is commonly believed. Rather, Benedict Arnold was acting at the request of George Washington, because Washington wanted Arnold to help him create a dictatorship of the proletariat and the abolition of private property."

A reader who knew her ancient history would recognize that the newly-discovered "Arnold document" was almost certainly not a historically accurate account of the relationship between George Washington and Benedict Arnold. The reader would know that the terms "dictatorship of the proletariat" and "abolition of private property" come from a political philosophy, Marxism, which was created long after Washington and Arnold were dead. The reader would also know that the most reliable records from the 18th century provided no support for the theory that Washington or Arnold favored a dictatorship of the proletariat or the abolition of private property.

This Friday's coverage of the so-called "Gospel of Judas" in much of the U.S. media was appallingly stupid. The Judas gospel is interesting in its own right, but the notion that it disproves, or casts into doubt, the traditional orthodox understanding of the betrayal of Jesus is preposterous.

Do enjoy the whole thing.

For self-defense, women take up firearms. Article in today's Charlotte Observer.

More women, gun advocates say, are buying, shooting and carrying firearms -- in briefcases, purses or even on their hips.

For some, it's sport. But with violent crime up from five years ago and Charlotte-Mecklenburg police actively searching for a serial rapist, many women say it's about self-protection.

"Things out there are tough, for men and for women," Christy Barnes, a 22-year-old chiropractic assistant, said while practicing at a shooting range earlier this month. "I'd like to know I can handle myself."....

Dan Starks, who has taught firearms safety courses for 17 years said a firearm can give women the power to control almost any situation. And with crimes like carjackings and home invasions increasingly common, Starks says they need the protection.

"When you have a firearm in your hand, and the knowledge, skill and chutzpah to use it, nine times out of 10 you won't have to use it," he said. "Criminals don't like armed citizens."

Slow Thinking, Slow Loving. This week, Juan and I commiserated on a couple of matters. He is the responsible attorney on one of the cases, and I on the other of them. We are one another's consultant on these matters.

We commiserated on how "hard" these two matters are. That is, we complained because they took so much time to penetrate, to sort out the facts and the issues, and then to compose the appropriate plan. And time, the legal culture tells us, having surrendered to the bean-counters of the world, is money. For the modern lawyer, being fast is being good.

So Juan and I worry that being slow to grasp a matter either indicates callowness (the word Satan whispers into Juan's ear) or declining mental ability (the word he whispers into mine). But Juan is not callow, I can assure him. And Juan still thinks I have the horses. So part of what we do for each other is to say, "Yeah, that's hard! Here are some suggestions, and, by the way, you are a good lawyer."

The other part of that worry (and I fear its a larger portion than we care to admit) is that we may be "losing money" on the case. That is, we made a deal with the client under the assumption that the matter would take x amount of time, but it is turning out, as the case goes on, that the matter is taking x plus y. Even if our billing arrangement is a "straight hourly rate", we know that ethically speaking the case can only bear a fee of just so much. Even if the client doesn't complain, then our consciences will.

But we also know that, once a case is in the door, we really must give it all we have got. And I think we do, finally, do that. What a blessing it is to be out from under the pressure of the "big firm" where quality assessments really are on the basis of how many beans one puts into his jar. What we try to do, then, is to qualify the case carefully before we are engaged. We are getting better at that, I think. But the matter of how best to go about qualifyng a proposed engagement is another post. What I am talking about here is "slow thinking".

Actually, "slow thinking" is often the best sort of thinking there is. As one of Carol's marvelous dinners is to Subway's 6-inch turkey on wheat, the one often taking several hours in the preparation, not to mention the shopping, mental energy, and life-long experience, and the other about five minutes, so the fact finding, deliberation, discussion with peers, and many drafts of the complaint, the brief, or the opinion letter is to the "sidewalk opinion" that some laymen are able to trick from us, for which nothing is paid and for which we often give the exact value of that fee.

"Loving" is another area where our inferior nature often tells us simply to "go for it". But "slow loving" is so exquisite that in Ode to a Grecian Urn, Keats slows its progress to the point where it is frozen in time.

It is so difficult to be slow because we have allowed so many claims to bind us. The clutter I encounter is often so colorful and attractive. It only asks for a moment of my time. And like Gulliver, I am tied down by thousands of little moments as the weeks go by, none of them really going anywhere, none of them in any respect consistent with seeking God's Kingdom, seeking it first, and his righteousness.

Is Mexican Immigration Different? Should it be treated differently?

"The End of Iraq"

"The moment when Iraq could be held together as a truly unified state has probably passed. But a weak Iraq suits many inside and outside the country and it will still remain a name on the map. American power is steadily ebbing and the British forces are largely confined to their camps around Basra. A 'national unity government' may be established but it will not be national, will certainly be disunited and may govern very little. 'The government could end up being a few buildings in the Green Zone,' one minister said. The army and police are already split along sectarian and ethnic lines. The Iranians have been the main winners in the struggle for the country. The US has turned out to be militarily and politically weaker than anybody expected. The real question now is whether Iraq will break up with or without an all-out civil war."

From Peter Cockburn's article in the April 6, 2006 issue of the London Review of Books online.

SXSW Update - late breaking news

A few weeks ago South by Southwest music festival just finished, and here's what I saw: (All of these shows were great; I didn't list it if I was embarassed to have been there. The starred shows, though, were tremendous.)

Guero's Party
Milton Mapes

Paste Magazine Party
Jamie Collum
Josh Ritter*****
Over the Rhine*****

Red's Scoot Inn Eastside Party
John Vanderslice*****
Friends of Dean Martinez***** (my ears bled, though, I think)
Earlimart
Fiery Furnaces*****

Continental Club
Jon Dee Graham*****

Austin Java
Deadman

End of an Ear Records
Band of Horses*****

Austin Java
Christina Roberts

Good Home Trainin'
means, among other things, you know how to write a thank you note.

And now I need to getting around to thanking folks for my birthday presents. My Jan 27th birthday presents.

If one gets a year to write the Wedding Gift Thank You Notes, what's the statute of limitations on Birthday Gifts? 6 months?

Wal-Mart and the Inner City. See a recent feature on NPR about Wal-Mart's intention to open 50+ stores in inner-cities around America. And this article in the Chicago Tribune about what Wal-Mart is doing in a depressed neighborhood in Milwaukee.

Thankfully, there's no bias
Michael Barone on Mainstream Media:

somewhere around 90 percent of the writers, editors and other personnel in the news media are Democrats and only about 10 percent are Republicans. We depend on the news media for information about government and politics, foreign affairs and war, public policy and demographic trends -- for a picture of the world around us. But the news comes from people 90 percent of whom are on one side of the political divide. Doesn't sound like an ideal situation.
Of course, a lot of people in the news business say it doesn't make any difference. I remember a conversation I had with a broadcast news executive many years ago.
"Doesn't the fact that 90 percent of your people are Democrats affect your work product?" I asked.
"Oh, no, no," he said. "Our people are professional. They have standards of objectivity and professionalism, so that their own views don't affect the news."
"So what you're saying," I said, "is that your work product would be identical if 90 percent of your people were Republicans."
He quickly replied, "No, then it would be biased."

I liked the whole thing. I've come around to the position that while standard media outlets aren't terribly, horribly biased towards the left, they are generally biased towards the left. Seriously, I don't know how anybody learned anything about anything before it could be fact checked via the internet.

The Singularity Is Near
Micro$oft on a Mac! Big news today in the tech-blogosphere:

This is Boot Camp, an official Apple beta product, that allows you to dual-boot XP. . . . no hassle. You literally just install it, run it, and rock and roll. The best part? The absolute best part? Read some of the page copy:

Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means it’ll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes.

Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. But with Boot Camp, the Mac can operate smoothly in both centuries.

It’s like some OS X interns got drunk, wrote this, and then put up a “UJ SUXORZ!MIXCRO$OFTLOLOL” page.

Splitting Hairs
Yesterday, in writing an email, I wrote "a whole nother thing. . ." and thought, "man, that doesn't look right at all." So I erased it and re-wrote the sentence. But I continued to think about "a whole nother," because I've used those words in casual conversation plenty of times before. Why did it look so bad in print?

And then I realized what I meant to communicate was, "another whole thing".

For many years now I've known that it's bad form to split an infinitive. How bad is it to split an adjective?

StarWars Wiki
Everything you ever wanted to know about StarWars is at the Wookieepedia. I killed a good three hours there over the weekend. I would have killed more, but, you know, life got in the way.

A fine breakfast
Ladies & gentlemen, I give you, the breakfast burrito. Bacon/Sausage/Bean/Potato, Egg & Cheese, wrapped in a four tortilla. Pure breakfast goodness. I'd take it over a BE&C Croissant, or a BE&C Biscuit. Thoughts?

"Holy Mackeral!" Indeed! Good news at the McClintock's house.

Some Really Bad Theology, Just in Time for Easter.





Fr. Neuhaus, where are you when we need you?!

Post 999 The next post will be the 1,000th post on K&K. Who will it be? What will we discuss? Stay tuned.

Different Folks. I heard a piece on NPR this morning about a play entitled "Well", by someone named Lisa Kron. Ms. Kron makes a point about other people that is arresting. She said something like "Other people aren't you with different life experiences." The statement may be a little hyperbolic, but the idea instructs me profoundly.

The most immediate point where I am instructed is in the area of judging other people. "Well", I think as I raise my eyebrow at the conduct or statement of another, "I certainly wouldn't [say that] [do that] [handle the situation that way]." This is a common topic of conversations that I have with myself about other people. It makes me feel immensely better about myself, even though it is at the expense of how I feel about the other person. Certainly it keeps me focused on myself. And, after all, isn't this what I am all about? That is, all about myself?

Thinking of the other person as "you with different life experiences" is the riskiest when one is dealing with family members. One is apt to think that, of all the people in the world who are most likely to be "you with different life experiences", those people are your kin, especially your children. Now we really can crank up the judgmental apparatus when we deal with them.

This doesn't mean that one's advice and counsel to friends and loved ones are not important and should not be freely given. (The children certainly know, as now you do, dear reader, that I'm certainly free with mine!) (Indeed, we sometimes have a duty to give such advice and counsel and, sometimes, give it quite forcefully.) It simply means that we need to remain at all times conscious of the other's otherness and to remember that the other has a "father in heaven", a counselor, who has special plans for that other one and to whom that other one must ultimately account (as each of us must for himself, ultimately).

Further on the Immigration Mess.

What would the controversy look like now if Roe vs. Wade had gone the other way 30 years ago?

What would it look like if Roe vs. Wade had gone the other way, and we had, all along, been good Catholics?

"A Disrespectable Morass."

In response to Sean's comment a couple of posts below about the immigration situation, please see Daniel Henniger's column in the WSJ yesterday. Henninger states in part:

"Respect for the law" is part of the American bedrock. As Alexis de Tocqueville rightly said, each voter indirectly contributes to the making of our laws, and "however irksome an enactment may be, the citizen of the United States complies with it . . . because it originates in his own authority." That is the high-road argument against the illegal Mexicans.

Another 19th-century Frenchman close to the hearts of American conservatives is Frederic Bastiat, who had a further thought: "The surest way to have the laws respected is to make them respectable." Is our immigration law "respectable"? Need you ask?

America is a nation of laws by now so numerous that it provides jobs for more lawyers per capita than any nation on earth. They serve as legal lifeguards, saving mostly honest citizens from the legal system's capricious undertow. Medical malpractice and asbestos are two areas of law for which "respect" is about zero. A law's existence requires compliance, but not respect.

Some of the anti-Mexican sentiment likely reflects an embarrassed awareness of our degraded laws, and so it has chosen to draw a line in the legal sand over immigration. That won't change the fact that U.S. immigration law is a disrespectable morass.

Today's Nita-isms. Boomiedocks for "boondocks". Tarsus, a successful Ford model in the 1990s, driven around Asia Minor by the Apostle Paul during his fourth missionary journey.

Two Views on Immigration, reasonably expressed.

The Wall Street Journal's.

Tony Blankley's.

The pro-business, pro-immigration side gives lip service to enforcing the immigration laws, but believes a "guest worker" program will bring the rule of law to what is now an essentially unenforceable system.

The anti-immigration side, which insists that it is anti-illegal immigration and not anti-legal immigration, says "Show me some enforcement of present laws first, and then we will talk about liberalizing legal entry".

Disclaimer. I am not the one changing the little sayings at the top of the blog, just after the main title. I have my suspicions about who is doing this, but mainly I just want everyone to know it is not me.

GTD, 16 months later
In Dec04, I began practicing GTD-do (GTDo?), the way of Getting Things Done. Three houses, four offices, three jobs later, I'm still working through the way I follow this path. I'm still not satisfied that I've figured out the best use of my asap contextual lists/folders, and I haven't locked down on the Weekly Reviews, but I've still gotten so much out of David's approach.

My view of the process of work has been fundamentally changed. Practicing GTDo has built the habits of mind that make me think incrementally and next-action-ly about each project. This alone would be worth the price of the book. I've had some fairly massive projects in the last 16 months, and big reason I survived was the next-action approach. In my most overwhemled days, I was able to gain momentum by taking seriously baby steps towards the goals. This may seem the self-evident way to do things. It certainly seems so to me, but getting my brain to, by default, think about the next tiny increment of movement forward was a huge retraining for me.

The other major difference in how I approach work is in how I view the stuff that comes across my attention's field of vision, whether it's digital or physical. The discipline of categorizing things according to David's workflow has been very helpful. It's enabled me to process a whole lot more stuff & information than I used to be able to do. Actionable? Y - Do, Delegate, Defer; N - Eliminate, Incubate, Reference. I find this to be key in keeping the stuff & information flow moving.

In terms of working with folks colloboratively, I am less tolerant of business meetings/discussions that don't end with actionable outcomes. I'm fine if the outcome is deferred a long way off, but I know that unless we agree on what we decided to do, and who is responsible to do it it probalby won't get done, and that meeting was probably a waste of my time. Not to say that I'm mean about it, just that if no one else asks, I'm going to ask, "Ok, are we agreed to do A? Then my understanding is that John will do 1, I'll do 2, Jane 3, and then we'll meet again so we can put it all together for A. Is that right?"

Moving to a black-belt level in GTDo will involve building the discipline to actually do Weekly Reviews, er, weekly. I think once I start doing that, I'll finally be able to sweep up to the 5,000 feet, 10,000 feet & stratosphereic views of my work to make some top level decisions about long-term goals and such. The great thing about GTDo, though, is that I can get work done, done well, and have a good sense of accomplishment, even if I don't have any major life goals planned out in advance.

But, seriously, that Weekly Review would be so helpful.

Does Bush Have it Wrong on Immigration?
At least one columnist thinks so. And this is not good. Is America the "Big Pinata"? My friend, Joe, was talking about this issue during our daily ham radio QSO two days ago. He's alarmed and talking about it - and talking politics is simply not done on ham radio, which is an indication of the worry this matter is raising.

Liturgy
Kells & I will start the new member process at Westlake Hills Presbyterian Church (USA) next week. One of the things I really enjoy about the Sunday service there is the liturgy. Here's how it went down last week:

Call to Worship (standing, call & response)
Hymn of Praise (standing, hymn)
Prayer of Adoration (standing, hymn)
Prayer of Confession (seated, prayer in unision)
Silent Confession
Assurance of Pardon (standing, hearing from the pastor)
Grateful Response (standing, a stanza of a hymn)

Greeting (everybody shakes hands, etc.)
Life of the Church (announcements)
Offering (Money & Musical)

Gospel Reading
Sermon
Communion
Song of Praise
Benediction
Song of Response

Perhaps this is standard Presby(USA) practice, but only since attending WHPC has it come to my attention: We don't talk to each other, in announcements or "Greeting", until we've all Confessed, received our Assurance of Pardon, and given a Grateful Response. I really like that.

It's as if the entire congregation gets to start fresh at 11:20am (or whenever we're done with the Grateful Response) each Sunday and then we all start interacting together. That seems right to me: that we all confess our sin to God & each other (even if it's via a formal unision prayer), receive the pardon of God, and are then free to interact both with God (in/during the preaching of the Word) and with each other with clean consciences.

Sometimes we get late to Church and walk in right at the "Greeting" time. I always feel like I'm one step behind everyone else and not quite ready to shake anyone's hand yet. They've all gotten to confess their sin to each other and God, but I missed out on that community act. It kind of feels like I've skipped the most serious part of the service and am only sneaking in for the easy stuff. (As in, grinning, shaking hands, and passively listening to an entertaining and thought provoking sermon.)

I get hit upon at Subway. (Obviously, I'm not ready to go back to work.)

Years ago, when I was with the "big firm", one of my married contemporary lawyers (now divorced) remarked on how a particular attractive secretary was "hitting on" him. (I take that to mean "to flirt with intention".) I expressed surprise. Really, I had never heard of that happening in the firm, we were all so busy and intense, but he said that it happened to him a lot. "Why, it never happens to me!" I blurted. (I thought to myself, "Why did I say that?" "Am I disappointed?" "Am I relieved?" I didn't come up with an answer for myself.)

He said, "Well, you just don't have the look". He was not able to explain the look that you have to have to invite female fishing expeditions nor the look that I have that doesn't. Just as well, of course.

So Monday I am standing in line at the Subway where I go. Its not in the nicest area nor is it the nicest Subway. Its in a dipalpidated "food court" in a run down building next to Macy's (ne Burdines) on Flagler Street. I walk right past a new one to go there, because I started going there years ago and got to know the manager, a Pakistani who brings his little boy to help him when school is out. He's such a nice man that I have become one of his more loyal customers.

He has developed several other Subways over the years, and lately he has left the store in the hands of his employees, whom I also know and who are competent people. He is off managing his growing sandwich empire. At the cashier's position, where he used to sit, is a new member of the team, however, a Pakistani woman who is somewhere, I think, in her early forties. The main thing that arrested me about her appearance was the diamond in her one of her nostrils (which I find, uh, painful to look at).

She's been there about 10 days. Monday I get my sandwich and move over to her spot to pay. I am untypically fully dressed in my lawyer's uniform, because I had an appointment outside the office and came back by the Subway for lunch. (Usually I'm without the coat, my tie is loosened, my sleeves rolled up, and I am reading the WSJ.) Today I am 100% spiff and undistracted by any newspaper.

She says to me, "Hi, you're the reason I come here every day. Just to see you."

(I think "What? . . . What did she say?")

"Oh, uh, Hi, how are you? I don't want the combo. Just the sandwich. Bye!"

Really, this has me puzzled. Have I crossed over the Santa Claus line here, so that when younger women see me, they think, "What a sweet old man!" Or am I getting hit on at Subway? Each of those possible answers has its definite down-side.

Whatever, its Wendy's for me from now on.

What's Wrong with this Picture.

I went to the dentist yesterday to get my teeth cleaned. There are three or four dentists there and three or four "hygentists" (Does that mean that the dentists aren't?). I have my dentist (the dentists are all male), but I have formed no attachment to any of the hygenists (hereinafter refered to as "h" in the singular and "h's" collectively)(the h's are all younger and female). I have been going there for several years and so each of the h's has cleaned my teath at one point or another. The h's have one thing in common. They talk a LOT. (It would be fine if they said nothing. Really.)

I had a new one yesterday, and, sure enough, she talked a LOT. She noted right away that I was a lawyer and asked what kind of law I practiced. Then she told me her son was applying to law school and was waiting to hear from them. That's the story I would like to tell, the story about her son as she related it to me. Nothing really earth shaking, but I am taking a break here, you understand, and this is all I've got right now.

(Note to Florida Bar: she did not engage me as her attorney, and there is no attorney-client privilege involved.)

Her son graduated a year ago from a FL school that is in the Final Four. He had a double major in Business Admin and Engineering, graduating in five years. I say more power to him, because the Lizard school has a great reputation in each of those areas. But after a year as an engineer, he decided he didn't like it and applied to law school. He quit his well paying engineering job and went to work for Legal Aid earning next to nothing, while he did his law school applications and waited to hear from them. (At this point, my right eyebrow shoots up, but she is working on my upper right molars and does not notice.)

He applied to (1) the Lizard Law School, which I consider the top one in FL, (2) the law school of the Florida Native Americans who, among other things, wrestle FL Lizards for big tourist bucks but, as far as I know, do not populate the student body in any appreciable number, and (3) the Ibis Law School, which, of the three is probably the least in terms of reputation. Not a bad law school, mind you, but I rank it number three. State resident tuition is about $7000 per year to the two state law schools and $30,000+ to UM.

For a reason which was explained to me by h at great length but which I will not detail here (I've already lost half of my readership by now to Sean's blog), he will miss admission to FL for this fall, but could get in for next fall, if he waited. That leaves UM and FSU. He wants to go to UM. (My other eyebrow shoots up, but she's on the left, lower molars by now.)

Why?

His girl friend lives here.

He wants to go to law school NOW.

Let's see here. $21,000 for a state school versus nearly $100,000 for mediocre UM.

I took that sucking thing out of my mouth and said something like, "He could fly her up every weekend for the difference!" H said, "Yeah, that's what I told him". I mumbled something, and she said, "He's really very bright and was at the top of his class at UF", etc.

Maybe its a Florida Lizard thing, but would someone help me here? This guy is going to become a lawyer with this sort of judgment? (Well, maybe he'll go into politics.)

On top of that, this family does not have the money. He will borrow this money. H said that they could probably handle the FSU tuition, but not the UM tuition. So he graduates from law school with a $100,000 debt. Nice way to start life, especially since you don't have to start that way, especially when you are getting less value for your money at UM than at FSU or Florida.

Maybe someone will explain this to me. Is he so head over heals with this girl that he is afraid to leave her alone in Miami? Does he really think he'll have all that much time to check up on her during his first year of law school even if he is in Miami? Do you think this is a genetic thing and I should ask for another h next time?

April 15 is coming. Don't be a Moran. (Actually, its April 17 this year.) Or maybe you can get someone to do it for you. (Caution: the last link is a little risque.)

Dalrymple on D.H. Lawrence and "Lady Chatterley's Lover".

"[L]iteral-mindedness is not honesty or fidelity to truth - far from it. For it is the whole experience of mankind that sexual life is always, and must always be, hidden by veils of varying degrees of opacity, if it is to be humanized into something beyond a mere animal function. What is inherently secretive, that is to say self-conscious and human, cannot be spoken of directly: the attempt leads only to crudity, not to truth. Bawdy is the tribute that our instinct pays to secrecy. If you go beyond bawdy and tear all the veils away, you get pornography and nothing else. In essence, therefore, Lawrence was a pornographer, though a dull one even in that dull genre."

-from Our Culture, What's Left of It: the Mandarins and the Masses.

Lawrence was big in the Duke English department 1964 - 1968, as Playboy was in the men's dorms. Is he of any moment now?

"I Survived 'Right to Choose'." Bumper sticker seen at the Hialeah MetroRail Station parking lot this morning.

Metonymy. The NET Bible is a load. Not counting the cover, the book is nearly 1 and 3/4 inches thick. Not counting the satellite pictures of the Holy Land, there are 2,543 pages. It does not fit neatly into my back pocket. It does not fit into any pocket. So it is my Sunday morning Bible, and the center aisle of our church is wide enough for the dolly.

What makes the thing so big are the footnotes. For most of the pages, I would say that the footnotes take up at least one half, if not two-thirds, of the page. For a lawyer, this is like candyland. We live for footnotes.

There is enough space in our worship service to do a little multi-tasking, using the NET Bible as one's screen. For the past several weeks, in addition to following the minister as he moves through Acts during his sermons, I have been looking at other passages that are suggested by his remarks, diving down into the footnotes for as long as I can stay down there without having to come back up to the verse for my breath. This morning I decided not only to follow the Acts passages, but also to start reading the psalms during the services. So I started at the First Psalm and blew all the way through to nearly the fourth verse of Chapter 1.

The first verse of Psalm 1 reads "How blessed is the one who does not follow the advice of the wicked or stand in the pathway with sinners, or sit in the assembly of scoffers." This verse has 9 footnotes. The footnotes are so thick on the page where Psalm 1 begins that the scripture text only gets as far as the beginning of verse 4.

The first footnote is at the end of the phrase "How blessed", and I want to talk about that, but let me say something about how fresh is the NET Bible text. There is nothing contrived about the translation, and contrivance really puts me off. (I hate to admit this, but I just cannot relate to "the Message", as great a scholar as Peterson is.) I find the NET translation crystal clear thus far, and there is a sort of pleasure in reading how the translators express anew passages with which I have been familiar nearly all of my life.

The footnote that follows "How blessed" states: "The Hebrew noun is an abstract plural. The word often refers metonymically to the happiness that God-given security and prosperity produce . . . "

"Refers metonymically". This is a new adverb for me. Lawyers do not think that way nor write that way. I had to go look that word up. The noun form is "metonymy" and, according to Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition (1938 - If I were a pagan I would worship this book!), it is a rhetorical device that means

"The use of one word for another that it suggests, as the effect for the cause, the cause for the effect, the sign for the thing signified, the container for the contained, etc. (darkness was the saving of us, for the cause of saving ; a man keeps a good table , instead of good food ; we read Virgil , that is, his poems; a man has a warm heart , that is, warm affections)."

(As a synonym for metonymy, the dictionary gives synecdoche, and that certainly clears things up for me.)

But back to metonymy and Psalm 1.

Look at verse 2 of your NIV. The NET Bible translates the first part of verse 2 as "Instead, he finds pleasure in obeying the Lord's commands". Appended to "instead" is footnote 11. The footnote states that the literal translation of this part is "his delight [is] in the law of the Lord", which, to one who first memorized Psalm 1 in the KJV, is the more familiar translation. The footnote indicates that the translator went directly to the idea to which the literal Hebrew metonymically refers:

"In light of the following line ['he meditates on his commands day and night'], which focuses on studying the Lord's law, one might translate, 'he finds pleasure in studying the Lord's commands.' However, even if one translates the line this way, it is important to recognize that mere study and intellectual awareness are not ultimately what bring divine favor. Study of the law is metonymic here for the correct attitudes and behavior that should result from an awareness of and commitment to God's moral will; thus 'obeying' has been used in the translation rather than 'studying'."

I think what I like about the NET Bible is that the reader is simply not patronized, neither in the text translation nor in the annotations. The reader is treated like a grown-up.

Remind me of this and take away my keys when the time comes.

"Motorists 85 and older now surpass 16 year olds in frequency of fatalities per mile driven, and nearly match teenagers in rates of insurance claims for property damage, according to statistics from the insurance industry and the federal government. Drivers 65 and older are more likely than teens to have fatal multivehicle crashes at intersections, the data show."

-- Today's WSJ

The forecast.
There's a 90% chance that I'll be teaching here in the next school year.

Jesus Unempowered. Last night at our Bible study at TWT we looked at Mark 6:1-12. There are two sections to this passage, and the first part, the part dealing with Jesus returning to his home town of Nazareth, raises the question (at least in my mind) of the extent to which or the way in which one's will participates in God's redemptive work.

The townspeople reject Jesus. Really, they go beyond that. Their remarks imply that his power is not from God but from Satan, that, if we take away these evil powers from Jesus, what we have left is a mere laborer and, actually, worse than that, we have the son of a fornicator. Pretty nasty stuff.

In this passage, Jesus "could not do any miracles there [in his home town], except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them." Jesus apparent inability to perform miracles is clearly linked to the lack of faith of the townspeople. "And he was amazed by their lack of faith".

The only other part of the Gospels where Jesus is described as being "amazed" is in Matthew 8, where Jesus is amazed at the greatness of the faith of the Roman centurion. That faith is connected with Jesus healing the Roman's servant from a distance.

There are many places where faith is linked to God's intervention and great works.

Maybe this is a lot simpler than I think it is. But sometimes I read theology that seems bent on banishing the significance of one's works from the most profound questions of a person's relationship with God. So the idea of "faith" (which is a kind of work, is it not?) having such a profound influence on the working of God's will seems new and surprising.

But, of course, there is a sort of Catch 22 here. The counterargument seems to go like this. One has this "saving faith" only because the Holy Spirit is working in one's heart. Grace is, finally, irresistible. So, really, we do not have an individual "work" of one's will. We have a work of God. Hmmmm. Not a completely satisfying argument. This is why I don't make my living as a theologian.

The Human Heart.

Gradually it was disclosed to me [in the Gulag] that the line separating good from evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either - but right through every human heart - and through all human hearts.

Solzhenitsyn in The Gulag Archipelago, as quoted by Dalrymple in Our Culture, What's Left of It.

Bearing Arms
Glenn Reynolds writes over at the UK's Guardian:

. . . this led me to speculate a few years ago that the right of people to be armed to resist genocide should perhaps be regarded as the next international human right.

An article forthcoming in the Notre Dame Law Review takes a much deeper look (pdf) at that very question, with particular emphasis on Darfur, and notes that the victims of the genocide are effectively disarmed by law and international embargo while the perpetrating janjaweed militias are armed and financed (as is common in genocides) by the Sudanese government. For the people of Darfur, relying on the government to protect them is absurd, as the government is behind their murder. Relying on the international community, on the other hand, is absurd because the international community is - at the most charitable - absurd. In fact, as is also the case with most genocides, much of the international community is complicit, at least to the extent of turning a blind eye to conduct that would otherwise imperil important government contracts, or oil ventures.

Given that this sort of behaviour is par for the course when genocides occur, who would dare to say that the inhabitants of Darfur do not have a right to arm themselves and resist their killers with force?

This makes me think even more seriously about exercising my own 2nd amendment right.

Cultural Winds
From an article by Frederica Mathewes-Green

The influence of the culture on all those individuals, including Christians, is less like that of a formal institution and more like the weather. We can observe that, under current conditions, it's cloudy with a chance of cynicism. Crudity is up, nudity is holding steady, and there is a 60 percent chance that any recent movie will include a shot of a man urinating. Large fluffy clouds of sentimental spirituality are increasing on the horizon, but we have yet to see whether they will blow toward or away from Christian truth. Stay tuned for further developments.

As Mark Twain famously remarked, everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it. I think much of our frustration is due to trying to steer the weather, rather than trying to reach individuals caught up in the storm.

J. Long used culture as weather imagery way back when he first wrote Emerging Hope. I find it to be quite an apt & useful metaphor.

. . . when Christians gather, there's less talk about humility, patience, and the struggle against sin. Instead, there's near-obsessive emphasis on the need for a silver-bullet media product that will magically open the nation to faith in Jesus Christ. Usually, the product they crave is a movie. Now, I'm delighted that Christians are working in Hollywood; we should be salt and light in every community that exists, and so powerful a medium clearly merits our powerful stories. But it's telling that the media extravaganza so eagerly awaited is not a novel or a song, something an individual might undertake, but a movie: something that will require enormous physical and professional resources, millions of dollars, and, basically, be done by somebody else.

This focus on an external, public signal is contrary to the embodied mission of the church. Christ planned to attract people to himself through the transformed lives of his people. It's understandable that we feel chafed by what media giants say about us and the things we care about, and that we crave the chance to tell our own side of the story. It's as if the world's ballpark is ringed with billboards, and we rankle because we should have a billboard too. But if someone should actually see our billboard, and be intrigued, and walk in the door of a church, he would find that he had joined a community that was just creating another billboard.

Ouch. That nicely puts language around on of my greatest fears in creating culturally relevant evangelism &/or worship services. Not that this isn't a good project, just that this is clearly one of the occupation hazzards of the project.

One excellent way to see how much our culture's passing weather patterns have influenced us is to read old books. If you receive all your information from contemporary writers, Christian or secular, you will never perceive whole concepts that people in other generations could see. Every Christian should always have at his bedside at least one book that is at least fifty years old-the older the better. C.S. Lewis has a wonderful passage on this phenomenon in his introduction to St. Athanasius' "On the Incarnation":"Every age has its own outlook. It is specially good at seeing certain truths and specially liable to make certain mistakes. We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books."

The "old books" can help us discern the prevailing assumptions of our cultural moment, not only concerning the content of our discussions, but their style.

Here at K&K we never pass up an opportunity to broadcast the signal: You Should Be Reading More & Deeper!

Night Stand
What texts are moving through the MLS queue.

Recently exiting:
The First World War, John Keegan. Excellent & Educational. I'm looking forward to reading his books on WWII.
Ghost Bridades, John Scalzi. A kind of sequal to Old Man's War, but you needn't have read the latter to enjoy the former. A quick read, but very fun.
Moneyball, Michael Lewis. Recommended by many, but put in my hands last week by Joel Bush. I can see what the fuss was about: a great & heretical view of the business of baseball. I never want to be in that business, but it was very interesting to read about. Many non-baseball insights in that book.

Now entering:
An Army Of Davids, Glenn Reynolds. Indeed.
The Denial of Death, Ernest Becker. Recommended by Jef Sewell. He said, "I recommend this book to everyone, but nobody ever reads it." How could I not read it with a challenge like that?
The Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn. A birthday gift from Walter & Morgan. The kind of birthday gift that says, "Here's a little two year project for you."

Running in queue:
Getting Things Done, David Allen
Ready For Anything, David Allen
Concerning The Inner Life, Evelyn Underhill.

Stalled in queue:
Essential McLuhan, Marshall McLuhan, Eric McLuhan. I think I would have been better off reading one of Marshall's actual books to begin with, rather than an anthology. But I will finish this and move to one of those.
One Dimensional Man, Herbert Marcuse. Recommended by a neighbor, but I have trouble staying engaged with Marxist rhetoric. Slow going. I much prefer Capitalist rhetoric.

What's going through your reading queues?

Surprise Ice
I'm cleaning up the kitchen after Kellsey & I had a neighbor over for a delightful dinner. There's all kinds of commotion in Austin, between SXSW & a March Madness with UT at the dance. But I'm taking my time washing dishes, sipping my left-over wine from dinner, and listening to the Kings of Convenience's latest album, Riot On An Empty Street, play on the stereo.

Kells & I both highly recommend the album. They're a kind of a 21st Century Simon & Garfunkel. (In fact, they explictly state that they love S&G and model themselves after them.)

What struck me tonight was their lyric in "Suprise Ice":

Love comes like surprise ice on the water.




Lots of falling-in-love imagery stress the suddeness of it, but don't take into account other aspects of falling in love. This lyric feels like a better metaphor to me because love often happens in a context conducive to love. But just because you have a conducive environment, doesn't necessitate falling in love.

So you have a cold cold day, but no ice. And it stays cold. No ice. Then, suddenly one morning there's ice on the water. It isn't that you can't look back and see the set-up for it, but you never can predict when the gestalt moment will happen.

"Mr. Jordan" and Small People. Could be our genes, Aidan, but its way too early to tell. "Mr. Jordan" was small. He was your great, great-grandfather on my mother's mother's mother's side, and married Della Lanford, daughter of Malmouth Lanford. He was a fine businessman in Atlanta. He was always referred to as "Mr. Jordan" by everyone else in the family, a sign of deep respect. I never met him. He died before I was born. But his widow came down to see us every year. When she was here, she worked around the house all of the time, never letting up. She was a small person, and she was of absolutely sterling character. Good genes come in small packages.

(By the way, Jordan is pronounced "Jer-den".)

'Nita and Names. I picked up my mother from the hospital this morning and brought her home to Epworth. She was in great spirits and in good shape. (On the way down in the hospital elevator, she "hit" on a young intern who had been in to see her the day before. He said "I'm married".) Whatever her affliction on Wednesday, it passed on by fairly quickly. (I think it was gone by the time I reached the ER.) I spoke to Steve Fields this morning, and he said that nothing showed up on the tests and he has perscribed no medication. (Thank you, Steve.) She definitely has these "spells" and, maybe, one day one of those spells will send her on to Glory. But for now, she's back. I'm glad.

Which is the occasion for reflecting on how she talks, especially names, since we had some (mostly negative) interest in the first name of my children's great-great-grandfather's Malmouth Lanford. The following is a table showing how a given name in our family is spelled and how it is pronounced if you are from deep, deep East Point, Georgia.

Malmouth is "Mammoth"

Paul is "Paw-uhl"

Walter is "Wuh-all-tuh"

Carlos is "Call-us"

Juanita is "Wuh-oo-nee-tuh". That "Wuh-oo" part takes so long in rolling off the tongue that the name is usually shortened to "'Nita".

Ken is "Kee-un"

Tim is "Tee-um"

Francis is "Fray-in-sus"

Hemperley (my mother's maiden name) is "Hemp-lee"

There are more, but they don't come to mind right now. Maybe you have some to add.

Malmuth Lanford. My mom (Juanita) had what we can only describe as a "spell" yesterday and made her way to the nurses' station at Epworth. They were alarmed, called 911, and she's in the hospital. I saw her in the ER last night and she was better, but they admitted her. I spoke to her this morning and she had already seen Dr. Steve Fields, the son of the doctor who took care of me as I was growing up and for whom I baby-sitted (baby-sat?) a couple of times. (Steve's parents remain friends of ours and are clients. Steve takes care of Nancy Jones' mother too. Nancy is my paralegal. Who said you can't have deep and complex relationships in South Florida?) Mom said that Steve doesn't believe its her heart, but she will stay at least one more night and see a cardiologist today. We can't figure out what happens to her. Something definitely does happen to her, however. About six months ago we were checking this out with assorted specialists, and Mother, while being examined by one of these high-powered people, had a "spell". He was impressed but had no idea. I think its some sort of mini-stroke, but what do I know. The physicians have no idea at this point and are not treating what they don't know, which is honest at least. Anyway, I hope to bail her out tomorrow.

All of that is by way of introduction, because while speaking to her on the phone this morning she talked about her great-grandfather, Malmuth Lanford, whom she dearly loved. We got into "Greatgrandpa Lanford" (herein "GGPL") because we were talking about how old she and I are, which amazes the two of us. She is 85 and I am 60 this year. She brought up GGPL because "he lived until he was 90", describing it in a manner that implied living this long was an achievement as I think it was.

GGPL was a farmer who lived outside of Stone Mountain Georgia, and Juanita spent a few weeks each summer on the farm when she was a little girl. His family farmed there during the Civil War, but Juanita is careful to say that "they had no slaves". GGPL was a little boy when Sherman's army came through, Sherman having beat Atlanta to a pulp and heading for "the Sea". There was a great crop of corn standing in the fields, and the Yankees burned it. It created an indelible family memory, and I never hear about GGPL without being told that story. It made living through the winter without starving a matter of some doubt, but obviously GGP got through it.

GGPL was a Christian, and Juanita went to Corinth Church in Stone Mountain with him and her great-grandmother when she visited. It was a "Missionary Baptist" church, a precursor, I think, to the Southern Baptists. They were "Missionary" so as to distinguish themselves from "Hardshell" or "Primitive" Baptists who did not believe in missions and felt that salvation or not was predestined, so why bother. Juanita said that when GGPL prayed, he got down on his knees.

I told Juanita that despite her admiration for GGPL living to 90, I am holding out for 100 for her.

Aidan at 17 months. What a guy!

Will Williams. In the current issue, FT publishes a letter from this DC graduate ("a proud alumnus") who lives in Waco. In response to Terry Eastland's "God and Man at Davidson" in the January issue, Will writes in part:

To drop the requirement that all trustees be active members of a Presbyterian, or indeed any, church and then to represent that act as truer fidelity to Davidson's Reformed tradition is redolent of subterfuge and far from the instruction of John Calvin or the Scriptures he prized.

Right on, Will!

"The Two-Hundred-Year War". The April 2006 issue of First Things arrived yesterday. They seem to come so quickly, and its very difficult to keep up with them. On the other hand, I have discovered what the annual vacation is for: catching up on all the unread articles in the First Things issues of the prior year.

In the meanwhile, then (who was it who said that we "live in the meanwhile"; probably Fr. Neuhaus), I cherry pick. I look at the front cover, which really has a useful design and lays out all the innards of that issue, and see what interests me immediately. Often its what Fr. Neuhaus is writing about in his column "The Public Square".

On the train this morning, I read his post on the issue of whether the West is at war with Islam. For one thing, the post has a short bibliography of titles that treat this issue, a biblio that would be a useful way to move into this subject. But the post is mainly a review of a new book by Mary Halbeck of Johns Hopkins, entitled Knowing the Enemy: Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror.

I would like to read all of those books! But I can't even get through the FT articles. Maybe that's part of what you do in heaven. Like my vacation, you spend part of eternity catching up on your reading. Heaven will be a happy place.

New William Sean McClintock pics.

All right!! Dolphins get Daunte!

Right on, McCain! The senator does Streisand.
(Transcript here.)

SouthBySmallWorld
This morning, Aidan and I ran into Doc Searls at our Starbucks. Clearly a man of good taste, he discovered the seat with the best view of the sunrise. I hope the Sbux staff cleaned it from yesterday morning, otherwise I'm afraid the "lens flare" error he got on his camera might have been caused by "Aidan Drool" left over from Aidan smearing his face across that window as per usual.

I saw Doc yesterday in this panel at SXSWi. As I told him this morning, I really enjoyed that panel. It's just so fun to hear the continued conversation around the idea that "markets are conversations." (I like to think that what we're doing with The Company is a small part of that.) It seems to me that what they were talking about in the above panel is part of the 21st century continuation of the Great Conversation. Which, as Kith&Kinners know, makes it intrinsically interesting.

On a side note, I haven't posted about Aidan & I at Sbux lately, but I have been thinking about it. Seeing Doc there triggered it again. Sbux is definitely not Keep Austin Weird (tm). When we first moved here, that was almost enough to keep us from going. But wanting to stroller to coffee won out over wanting to be cool, so Sbux it was. And we have found that the staff there are delightful and the other regulars are just as interesting as most everyone else we meet in Austin. Some mornings I think, "Maybe we should go to Jo's Coffee today." But that would mean missing out on seeing our friends at Sbux!

So we come back every morning and drool on the window. Sorry Doc!

K2 Update. UPS delivered to the office on Friday the box with the kit in it, a box packed within a box, and I opened it yesterday. I was amazed at how small the box that held the kit was. But, then, the unit when built will be only 3 inches high, 7.9 inches wide, and 8.3 inches deep, not including the plugs and things that stick out some from the back.

The kit box contained a very nice, plastic spiral bound "owners manual" that, mainly, lists the inventory and then tells you how to put the thing together. It leads the builder step by step through what appears to be a well considered process.

The parts are in various plastic bags that correspond to various phases of construction. There are also small envelopes with parts in them. Finally, there are the case materials, five pieces that will, somehow, fit together to make a enclosure.

But the first thing to do is to inventory the parts, and that's what I've been doing this weekend. (If anything is missing, then one emails the company and it sends the missing part or parts.) During the inventory process I sort out the various components, and group similar components in small zip lock bags in which I put a little note showing the part number and the value of the part. For example, a particular resistor with a value of, say, 100 ohms, would have a note in the zip lock bag that would say "R1 [if that's the part number] and 100".

The parts are very small, and their identifying information usually consists of tiny letters and numbers or color codes printed on the part. To see this information, I use a lamp that has a fluorescent bulb wrapped around a big magnifying glass. The lamp/magnifier is affixed to the end of an articulated arm clamped to my work table.

The resistors are among the tiny parts that are color coded. This is a problem because I am color blind. So I make a guess on the colors and then check my guess with a digital volt-ohm multitester ("DVM"), another Christmas gift.

There are 869 pieces to the kit, most of which need to be soldered in at least two places. Over the last several years, I have been making do with a cheap, 20 watt soldering iron from Radio Shack. But the Elecraft people urge the builder to use a "soldering station". This is a soldering device that allows the user to control the temperature and to change soldering tips as necessary. So I have ordered one of the soldering stations that Elecraft recommends.

Great care is to be taken in the choice of solder. There are many kinds and they come in numerous diameters. But only certain "rosin-core" solder types will do, and the diameter must be within certain limits. (I have to use the magnifier to do the soldering.)

On Elecraft's website there is some good help for builders, including photographs and a "reflector" where builders can exchange information on their projects and get help from engineers at the company.

Joy! The K2 kit arrived today.

Why the Aging Baby Boomers will not Bankrupt the Next Generation. Today I had a client conference with a fellow, early baby boomer (like me, born in 1946). His daughter was with him and she is a medical student. At a point toward the end of the conference, he brought up the subject of the huge cohort of baby boomers who are soon retiring and would put a terrible demand on medical services, etc. His daughter laughed and said that her professors at medical school say "not to worry". The boomers, they said, are all so overweight that they will die off much sooner than anybody anticipates. (Here, have a Coke.)

Donum Vitae. One of our readers, who commented on our post on Pregnancy and Moral Labor and whose nom de net is "Daughter of St. John", has pointed me to this publication of the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith. The following is from the introduction to that document, which is entitled "Donum Vitae" and well worth reading:

The exposition [of Donum Vitae]is arranged as follows: an introduction will recall the fundamental principles, of an anthropological and moral character, which are necessary for a proper evaluation of the problems [to which artificial procreation and related matters give rise] and for working out replies to those questions; the first part will have as its subject respect for the human being from the first moment of his or her existence; the second part will deal with the moral questions raised by technical interventions on human procreation; the third part will offer some orientations on the relationships between moral law and civil law in terms of the respect due to human embryos and fetuses and as regards the legitimacy of techniques of artificial procreation.

But what is the "Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith"? I emailed my friend and former law partner, John Immer, who is heavy, heavy, into Catholic matters and my local authority on the Catholic Church, "John, is this the Magisterium?" His reply:

"You betcha! Actually, it interprets the tenets of the Catholic
Faith, i.e. the Magisterium. Incidentially, the head of the Congregation
is an American Archbishop from San Francisco who was just made a
cardinal (Leveda). Theoretically, he is second in command to the Pope."

Now it would certainly be nice to have a "Congregation" of well educated, experienced Christians, carefully chosen and full of wisdom, thinking, studying, and praying these questions through and, finally, making a decision. (Provided, of course, that they agreed with you.) Among the things that was so attractive about Jesus was that he "spoke with authority". E.g. Matthew 7:29.

Work Fun
I'm going to SXSWinteractive this Saturday - Tuesday! Very, very fun. I'll get to be in the same room as the folks who started Technorati, Threadless, Adaptive Path and other very interesting webfolks, like Jason Kottke. The goal is to get new business for The Company. I'll let you know how it turns out.

It's the student, after all. Or, more precisely, the student's family. Carol pointed out this article from USA Today on student culpability in the falling performance of the American middle class student. Dalrymple makes a similar point in Life at the Bottom, where he notes the marked difference in the success of Indian students in the "underclass" section of London, where he served as a physician, from that of the children from "native" London families (if we can describe the shifting aggregations among those "native" people he describes as "families".) Dalrymple observes that the Indian children, raised in coherant families where the parents worked hard and were loyal to each other, were quite often able to study and work their way out of those neighborhoods, although some would be caught by the corrosive values of the larger culture that was doing great damage to the other young people Dalrymple saw. Dalrymple also observes that the testing standards that the government schools in England uses are very watered down versions of what went before, designed to make the English students, and therefore the educational bureaucrats, look more successful than they really are. At least in the US, we have a movement afoot, however awkward and annoying, to test government school students using national standards that are more than simply enabling window-dressing. (At least I hope they are. What do you think, Mary?)

The Mission Begins.

At last, I have reached the point of ordering a K2, the fabled transceiver kit manufactured by an actual US company, Elecraft. Elecraft is one of only two US electronics manufacturers still in the amateur radio transceiver business. (Thanks to all of you who have contributed to the "Radio Fund" over the last several Christmases and birthdays. Your generosity has helped make this momentous event possible.)

Here is what I will build, d.v.:




As I progess with this project, I will give you updates, because I am sure you share my excitement.

UPDATE: Scheduled delivery date 03/06/2006!

Sola Scriptura II.

The infallible rule of intepretation of Scripture, is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it may be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.

The Supreme Judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.

From Chapter 1 of the Westminster Confession.

Wherefore we do not despise the interpretations of the holy Greek and Latin fathers, nor reject their disputations and treatises concerning sacred matters as far as they agree with the Scriptures; but we modestly dissent from them when they are found to set down things differing from, or altogether contrary to, the Scriptures. Neither do we think that we do them any wrong in this matter; seeing that they all, with one consent, will not have their writings equated with the canonical Scriptures, but command us to prove how far they agree or disgree with them, and to accept what is in agreement and to reject what is in disagreement.

And in the same order also we place the decrees and canons of councils.

Wherefore we do not permit ourselves, in controversies about religion or matters of faith, to urge our case with only the opinions of the fathers or decrees of councils; much less by received customs, or by the large number of those who share the same opinion or by the prescription of a long time. Therefore, we do not admit any other judge than God himself, who proclaims by the Holy Scriptures what is true, what is false, what is to be followed, or what to be avoided.

From Chapter II of the Second Helvetic Confession

Be your own Beacon. I have previously posted about beacons, those radio stations around the world that transmit from various places at various frequencies and let you know how the propagation is working. I have learned that one can be his own beacon. You need to have an Amateur Radio Service license, but that's a small thing. Here's a link to a site by an Ogden Utah ham, Jim Southwick, N7JS, who describes his 10 meter beacon transceiver, which he put together himself. I am inspired. This goes on my project list immediately.

I read about Jim's project in the February 2006 issue of CQ magazine. A copy of the article is available at Jim's website, to which I link above, in PDF format.

Jim's article mentions a website by a British amateur that has "a very good list of beacons worldwide".

You don't need to be a ham to listen to these beacons. You need some sort of Short Wave radio. They are pretty inexpensive at Radio Shack. If you listen to a beacon and send the beacon guy an email telling him where and when you heard his signal, you will get a card from him, called a QSL card, and you will make him very happy.

No Girly-Men! From Harvard, of all places, a call for manliness. Also see here.

Sola Scriptura? Into chapter 3 of Catholic Matters: "The Authority in Question" Of course, Neuhaus and I are arguing, but he makes some telling points.

[Regarding the matter of authority, t]he dispute [between Protestants and Catholics] is usually framed as the authority of the Bible vs. the authority of the Church, or the authority of the Bible vs. the authority of "tradition". But that way of framing the question is, I believe, deeply incoherent. . . . The promise of Jesus that he would send the Holy Spirit to guide his disciples into all truth is a promise made to the Church [as opposed to individuals? I think that would be his position]. That promise is fulfilled, in part in the Spirit-inspired writing of the New Testament. But the guidance of the Spirit did not end there. The promise is that the Spirit would guide the Church to the end of time. The Spirit aided the Church in the writing of the inspired texts [we must agree]; guided the Church in recognizing which texts, of the many claiming inspiration at the time, were truly inspired [we must agree]; guided the Church in determining what would be the canon of the New Testament [yes, yes]; and guided the Church in declaring the unique authority of the canonical texts for all time [yes]. In sum, it is the Spirit guiding the Church from beginning to end, and the end is not yet [gee, you mean it didn't end with the Westminster Confession?].

Believe!
Alex and I are having a discussion about Group-Think as it relates to Faith over at Piebald Life. (This is the first post on the matter.) As usual, I have a stone-cold lock on the facts of the matter. That's what the voices in my head keep telling me, at any rate.

Yo Soy Catolico?

Fr. Neuhaus writes in the first chapter of Catholic Matters, the chapter entitled "The Church We Mean When We Say 'The Church':"

"The [Second Vatican] Council's document on Christian unity, Unitatis Redintegratio, says that all Christians who are baptized and believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour are 'in a certain but imperfect communion' with the Catholic Church. . . . Other Christians [that is, non-Catholic Christians] may bridle at this. They don't take kindly to the Catholic Church's assumption that they really are Catholics, although imperfectly so."

I don't take unkindly to this proposition.

Fr. Neuhaus dedicates his new book to Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J. "friend and mentor". It turns out that Cardinal Dulles was a Presbyterian before he moved away from imperfection and toward perfection. (Fr. Neuhaus doesn't like the word "convert" to describe a Catholic like himself, like Carinal Dulles, who was formally a non-Catholic Christian.)

What I Have Learned In 15 Years

Another really good article linked on Instapundit.

(Also posted by Carol)

Greatest Show on Earth.

The Return of Patriarchy

This is the title of an article by Philip Longman in Foreign Policy. This was linked today in Instapundit. Here is the introduction to the article:

Across the globe, people are choosing to have fewer children or none at all. Governments are desperate to halt the trend, but their influence seems to stop at the bedroom door. Are some societies destined to become extinct? Hardly. It’s more likely that conservatives will inherit the Earth. Like it or not, a growing proportion of the next generation will be born into families who believe that father knows best.

One of the observations he makes is that fertility rates are 12% higher in the states that voted for Bush in 2004 than in the states that voted for Kerry. His thesis has some interesting implications for the world and for the U.S. James Taranto has written often of a somewhat related phenomenon he calls The Roe Effect. I think this article is worth reading.

(This post is by Carol. I think it will say it's by Paul.)

Awaited with some eagerness, it arrives. Catholic Matters. I'll let you know.