tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-70224082024-03-08T09:08:38.608-05:00Heroes from the PastWeblog covering politics, theology, philosophy, IT consulting, Christian punk, sports, video games . . . anything but Justin Timberlake.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.comBlogger338125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-13194432527105279222008-03-06T18:32:00.001-05:002008-03-06T18:33:39.191-05:00School Shooting in South HollandApparently, <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-south-hollandmar07,0,5001320.story">there's been a school shooting</a> (in a loose sense) about 1/2 mile from where I used to live in South Holland.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-25777163961479977472008-03-05T11:50:00.002-05:002008-03-05T12:19:59.139-05:00Moses was on drugs?Well, that's <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080304/od_afp/israelreligionoffbeat;_ylt=AmWvbJnkxTBHhRak_eYQmv2s0NUE">what one Israeli cognitive psychologist claims</a> regarding the events on Mount Sinai. Why is a psychologist trying to analyze Biblical events? Why not leave that to historians, linguists, theologians, or spiritual leaders? Probably because he knew it would get him into Yahoo! News.<br /><br />This seems like just another example of an academic ranting about a subject in which he is unqualified, until we get to the money quote:<br /><blockquote><br />"As far Moses on Mount Sinai is concerned, it was either a supernatural cosmic event, which I don't believe, or a legend, which I don't believe either, or finally, and this is very probable, an event that joined Moses and the people of Israel under the effect of narcotics," [Benny] Shanon told Israeli public radio on Tuesday.<br /></blockquote><br />It's a perfect example of the scientific pitfall of naturalism. One of the bedrock tenets of modern science is that science deals with the natural, not the supernatural. Thus, when performing scientific analysis, a researcher usually assumes that there is no supernatural cause for observed events. That's all well and good, and the assumption is usually understood and factored (explicitly or implicitly) into the conclusions of the research.<br /><br />The pitfall comes when the researcher takes this assumption for the purpose of research, and applies it to their perspective on reality. This rapidly leads to a logical fallacy called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question">begging the question</a> or assuming the consequent: a researcher assumes something, makes observations based on that assumption, and then uses the observations to prove the assumption. That's exactly what Benny Shanon is doing. The logical progression is basically:<br /><ol><br /><li>Assume that Moses had an experience on Mount Sinai.</li><br /><li>For the purpose of scientific analysis, assume that Moses's experience was not supernatural.</li><br /><li>If Moses's experience was purely natural, the most likely explanation is a religious service incorporating hallucinogens.</li><br /><li>Therefore, Moses was probably high on Mount Sinai.</li><br /><li>Therefore, Moses's experience was probably not supernatural.</li><br /></ol><br />See how the assumption kinda gets lost around step four, and then is magically proven at the end? Either Shanon's a bad enough scientist that he's begging the question himself, or (more likely) he's making the argument in bad faith in order to gain a little notoriety. Instead, he should be claiming, "Assuming Moses didn't meet God on Mount Sinai, he was probably on drugs" -- a statement which is not at all controversial and merits only the response, "Well, duh!"UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-89143408932824696812008-02-28T19:17:00.002-05:002008-02-28T19:23:22.152-05:00Anyone remember Frodus?Anyone remember <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frodus">Frodus</a>? Well, Thrice does. <a href="http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?s=bf892f3a141b3a97e0c40764083ae75a&t=300078">BBC just played a track</a> off of their upcoming <em>Earth EP</em> (part of the <em>Alchemy Index</em> album), and it's a cover of Frodus's "The Earth Isn't Humming" from Frodus's <em>And We Washed Our Weapons In The Sea.</em>UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-44045240775246813912008-02-25T09:34:00.003-05:002008-02-25T11:47:55.794-05:00I'm backI had a friend beg me yesterday to restart this blog. I was pretty noncommittal at the time; I've thought about restarting this thing many times in the past couple years, but I'm always missing either the desire, the time, or the content. I figured the same would happen now, until I ran across CNN Living / Oprah.com's list of <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/02/25/O.bad.men/index.html">Ten guys women should run from</a>.<br /><br />Just for a second, ignore the fact that I'm reading this article at all, and check out guy #9: The Virtual Lover. From the name, I assumed this guy's problem would have something to do with an Internet addiction. Not quite:<br /><blockquote><br />What a relief it is when a man doesn't try to force you into bed on the first date. How charmed you are when, on the third date, he says he wants to wait until "you both can't stand it anymore." How sympathetic you become when, on the sixth date, he tells you how badly he was hurt by your predecessor. How confused you are six months later when you've realized his pager goes off every time you get naked, but he's still sending you roses and talking teddy bears.<br /></blockquote><blockquote><br />A surprising number of great romancers out there never get around to having sex. To the date-weary woman, this can seem like not the worst combination, but beware. Eventually he will blame his problems on the smell of your breath or the size of your thighs.<br /></blockquote><br /><br />That's right, women. You should be concerned about your dating relationship if your guy isn't sleeping with you by the sixth date; you should run from a relationship where this lasts as long as six months, no matter how he treats you otherwise.<br /><br />Let's engage in a bit of role reversal. What would you think about an advice column suggesting a man dump a woman solely because he isn't getting any?<br /><br />As a sidenote, CNN appears to be regurgitating <a href="http://www.oprah.com/omagazine/200306/omag_200306_guys.jhtml">four-year-old <em>O Magazine</em> stories</a>.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1115748633475933242005-05-10T13:02:00.000-04:002005-05-10T14:10:33.833-04:00Not Even Hiding It Any MoreCNN has the AP's review of Kingdom of Heaven up <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/09/film.the.crusades.ap/index.html">right here</a> that praises it for its political correctness. What does the review mean by political correctness? Well, Muslims didn't get angry:<br /><blockquote><br />The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee was among those worried groups, but half a dozen members came away greatly relieved after a "Kingdom of Heaven" screening arranged for them by Scott.<br /><br />"It's one of the better representations of Muslims we've seen out of Hollywood," said Laila Al-Qatami, a spokeswoman for the Washington-based group. "We thought that he did a good job tackling a potentially volatile subject and avoided doing a simplified, stereotyped story of Muslim vs. Christian."<br /><br />. . . . .<br /><br />Al-Qatami of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee said the only faults her group found with "Kingdom of Heaven" were small historical inaccuracies, changes made to beef up the movie's drama and romantic subplot involving Bloom's and Green's characters.<br /><br />"At the end of the day, we're happy," Al-Qatami said. "I think it's a fair picture of cultural and religious relations of the time."<br /></blockquote><br />That's all well and good, but what of the Christian reaction to the movie? There's no mention at all, even though in modern times the Crusades are a rallying cry for anti-<em>Christian</em> hatred rather than anti-<em>Muslim</em> hatred. The Crusades show institutionalized Christian religion at its worst, and are still used to flog Christians with guilt eight centuries later.<br /><br />AP doesn't say. But it does quote actress Eva Green reinforcing the Christians-bad/Muslims-good meme:<br /><blockquote><br />"I think Muslims will be extremely proud and happy, because they're seen as noble, chivalrous characters," actress Green said. "Especially in this Crusade, the Arab people behaved in a more noble way than the Christian people. Saladin was such a great character. He was the hero of his time."<br /></blockquote><br />Exactly. A movie about the Crusades is going to come down hard on Christians, not Muslims, but AP stakes the movie's political correctness solely on whether it offends Muslims. The Christian reaction should be at least half the story, but since we're talking in PC-ese it doesn't even merit a mention. And that's what I mean by "Not Even Hiding It Any More": the Christian perspective doesn't merit even a token mention anymore.<br /><br />Let's see whether the blogosphere will fill this information hole. <a href="http://crosblog.blogspot.com/2005/05/speaking-of-movies.html">Crosblog suggests</a> the Christian reaction won't be too positive:<br /><blockquote><br />The Muslims in the movie are shown without flaw, as magnanimous in victory as they are skilled in combat. Meanwhile, the number of Christians in this movie with any redeeming qualities, by my count, is four, and are clearly the exceptions to the rule of bloodthirsty hypocrite. (There's a moment at the end, when the loss of Jerusalem appears imminent, when the bishop declares "Convert to Islam! Repent later!" It's just funny.) <br /></blockquote><br /><br />Crosblog also points to <a href="http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7291">this article in Human Events</a>, which has this to say about the movie:<br /><blockquote><br />Kingdom of Heaven is a dream movie for those guilt-ridden creatures who believe that all the trouble between the Islamic world and the West has been caused by Western imperialism, racism, and colonialism, and that the glorious paradigm of Islamic tolerance, which was once a beacon to the world, could be reestablished if only the white men of America and Europe would back off. Except for one detail: it isn't true.<br /><br />Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith, author of A Short History of the Crusades and one of the world's leading historians of the period, called the movie "rubbish," explaining that "it's not historically accurate at all" as it "depicts the Muslims as sophisticated and civilised, and the Crusaders are all brutes and barbarians. It has nothing to do with reality." Oh, and "there was never a confraternity of Muslims, Jews and Christians. That is utter nonsense." <br /><br />Nor does Kingdom of Heaven take any notice of the historical realities of Christians and Jews who lived under Muslim rule. They were never treated as equals or accorded full rights as citizens, and always suffered under various forms of institutionalized discrimination and harassment. <br /></blockquote><br /><br />Meli's Moonlight <a href="http://melismoonlight.blogspot.com/2005/05/crusades-for-dummies.html">has this to say</a>:<br /><blockquote><br />Here is Yahoo! Movies' caption describing the film: <br /><blockquote><br />"KINGDOM OF HEAVEN is an epic adventure about a common man who finds himself thrust into a decades-long war. A stranger in a strange land, he serves a doomed king, falls in love with an exotic and forbidden queen, and rises to knighthood. Ultimately, he must protect the people of Jerusalem from overwhelming forces while striving to keep a fragile peace."<br /></blockquote><br />What it fails to mention is that the "overwhelming forces" the common man must protect the "people of Jerusalem" from are the Christians. In typical Hollywood Christophobic style, the revisionists are at it again, pushing cowardly along behind this bruiser of a summer smash hit and leaning heavily on star power to overcome the utter nonsense being passed off as history.<br /></blockquote><br /><br />Dr. Mike Kear of the Emmaus Theory <a href="http://emmaustheory.blogspot.com/2005/05/movie-review-kingdom-of-heaven.html">likes it</a>:<br /><blockquote><br />Good movie. Not world shaking, but certainly good. Great special effects, especially the city of Jerusalem. A small galaxy of stars including Liam Neeson, Jeremy Irons, Edward Norton (who we never really see), and of course Orlando Bloom. A true epic.<br /><br />. . .<br /><br />I think what Scott is trying to express is that Christians and Muslims can probably get along if we only can somehow rein in the fundamentalist extremists on both sides.<br /></blockquote><br /><br />Donald Sensing <a href="http://www.donaldsensing.com/?p=165">doesn't like it</a>:<br /><blockquote><br />The conflicts of the film are entirely one sided. The bad guys are all Christians, which is not really a criticism as the POV is from within the Christian kingdom. And there were some pretty sorry leaders among the real crusaders. Besides, the Christian king of Jerusalem is portrayed as a man of honor, courage and righteousness. No, my problem with these characterizations is not that the movie’s POV is so one-sided, it is that the portrayals are so darn wooden and shallow:<br /><br />Head bad guy to evil henchman: “Start me a war.”<br />Evil henchman: “It’s what I do.” <br /><br />And then he does so by letting the Templars loose on an innocent Muslim village where they literally hack everyone to death. Blood-spattered, the evil henchman mutters, “This is what I am. Somebody has to be me.” Maybe he could break into song!<br /></blockquote><br /><br />I'll let you guys know my own opinion once I've seen it.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1115744554787533902005-05-10T12:51:00.000-04:002005-05-10T13:02:35.066-04:00UpdateHey all!<br /><br />Haven't been on here in a few weeks for various reasons. Here's a quick update:<br /><br />I'm now working on Charlotte, North Carolina, on what should be a short project. The filters at the job site don't allow me to access blogspot, though, so I can't post messages during my free time there.<br /><br />Been feeling sick the past couple days.<br /><br />E2 is doing well, and that's actually where most of my free time has been going lately, leaving nothing for this blog. The Festival is still on for June 4th, although with any such thing there have been a couple bumps along the way. The compilation CD should be out in time for Cornerstone.<br /><br />Speaking of Cornerstone, I should write up a cgi script to figure out the booth schedule. Hmm. . .UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1113938626055841942005-04-19T14:55:00.000-04:002005-04-19T15:23:46.056-04:00New Pope<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/19/pope.tuesday/index.html">It's going to be Joseph Ratzinger</a>, who was Pope John Paul II's close personal friend, and the papacies will likely be very similar. He's taking the title Boniface XVI.<br /><br />I'm not sure what to think. This ensures that the Catholic church will stay in the right with regard to abortion, gay marriage, and some other important moral issues. But the church's theology and doctrine as a whole are far from the truth, and the papacy itself is offensive to me. Maybe I should be happy that it could have been worse, or maybe I should be disgusted that the office of pope continues. . .UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1113888000084582042005-04-19T01:08:00.000-04:002005-04-19T01:20:00.086-04:00Computer-Generated Gibberish Paper Accepted At ConferenceI've messed with the <a href="http://www.pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/">heuristic research-paper-writing computer program</a> before, but it was obviously just for goofing around -- or so I thought.<br /><br />The guys at MIT who wrote this gibberish-writing programs then had it write a gibberish research paper, submitted it to the World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, and <a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=2&u=/nm/20050415/od_nm/odd_gibberish_dc">had it accepted</a>.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1113887276313640572005-04-19T00:13:00.000-04:002005-04-19T01:07:56.313-04:00Moussaoui Planning to Admit 9/11 RoleStory <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64195-2005Apr18.html">here</a>. Of course, the same thing was said a year or two ago, when he entered and then withdrew a guilty plea.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1113371311219813462005-04-13T01:47:00.000-04:002005-04-13T01:48:31.220-04:00E2 FEST 2005The e2 Fest page is up and running on e2 Ministries' site! It's on June 4 in northwest Indiana, and chances are you know some of the bands!<br /><br />Go to <a href="http://www.e2-music.com ">http://www.e2-music.com</a> to check out the current band list and all other information. And if you're a Christian band in the Chicagoland area, contact us to get in!UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1113345245322138352005-04-12T18:30:00.000-04:002005-04-12T18:34:05.323-04:00Napoleon Dynamite Gets His Own BillSee the Idaho Legislature's Napoleon Dynamite Bill <a href="http://www3.state.id.us/oasis/HCR029.html#daily">here</a>.<br /><br />Money quote:<br /><blockquote><br /> WHEREAS, any members of the House of Representatives or the Senate of the Legislature of the State of Idaho who choose to vote "Nay" on this concurrent resolution are "FREAKIN' IDIOTS!" and run the risk of having the "Worst Day of Their Lives!"<br /></blockquote><br /><br />Yes, this is for real.<br /><br />Hat tip <a href="http://bunniediehl.worldmagblog.com/bunniediehl/archives/014035.html">Bunnie Diehl</a>.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1113168747994249012005-04-10T17:30:00.000-04:002005-04-10T17:32:27.996-04:00Bulls Lock Up Playoff SpotAs predicted here at Heroes from the Past <a href="http://hftp.blogspot.com/2005/01/bulls-are-back.html">back in January</a>! Full story <a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap;_ylc=X3oDMTBpZmFlcXBpBF9TAzk1ODYxOTQ4BHNlYwN0aA--?gid=2005040904&prov=ap">here</a>.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1112994356550964252005-04-08T16:39:00.000-04:002005-04-08T17:13:28.066-04:00Clean From Sin?I was just talking about a Christian's relationship to sin with <a href="http://47squared.blogspot.com">Prime Minister of Toast</a> last week, and now Doug van Pelt of HM Magazine has a <a href="http://www.hmmagazine.com/blogs/doug/archives/001227.php">great post</a>. Go read it all, but here's a quote:<br /><blockquote><br />Chapter 23 finds Job in the midst of his long ordeal. He describes his complaint as "bitter." It seems as if he feels that God is distant or not answering his prayers. He wishes, "If only I knew where to find Him...I would state my case before Him..." Job is confident that if and when he is tested before the Lord, that he will come out clean.<br /><br />I believe this is a confidence that we can have. Yes, I know that some believers have crafted a theology that allows them to wallow in their sin. I think that to be heresy. Yes, it is true that sin goes deeper than behavior. I think Jesus made that obvious with His great Sermon on the Mount. But, for instance, we can keep ourselves "clean." <br /></blockquote><br />Any thoughts? Can we as Christians be clean of sin on earth? Is it pride to consider ourselves free of sin through Christ? Is it self-centered to focus on our own flaws when there are so many people needing to hear the truth? Which is more important, righteousness or compassion? Is this a false dichotomy?<br /><br />There are two extremes, both of which come from the same source. The first extreme is that of legalism in its many forms. Legalists may be Pharisaical, and be conceitedly proud of their own sinlessness in comparison to others. On the other hand, some legalists are all too aware of their own sins, and are constantly working, unsuccessfully fighting their own sinful nature.<br /><br />The other extreme is a modern (or perhaps post-modern) reaction to this legalism. It's more insidious than legalism, and I think has really grown in my generation. This is the idea that we're all sinners, but in the grand scheme of things the sin doesn't matter. Since we're powerless to fight our sin, we should simply accept our flaws, move on, and focus on love and unity and being Christ to others. But they fail to realize that righteousness is an essential trait of compassion and Christ-imitation -- that our relationship with God is directly affected by our sin. I'm not sure what this position is called, and I <em>know</em> this term will carry the wrong connotations, but for lack of a better word I'll call it Libertism.<br /><br />What both of these positions ignore is that we <em>can</em> be free of sin -- through Christ. Legalism denies that <strong>Christ</strong> brings freedom from sin on earth. Libertism denies that Christ brings freedom <strong>from sin on earth</strong>. I think this denial, on both sides, is doing more to hurt Christ's work here in America than anything else.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1112991601564847822005-04-08T15:08:00.000-04:002005-04-08T16:20:01.566-04:00Google Satellite MapsJust having fun with Google's new map-to-sattelite-picture feature.<br /><br />Some interesting ones:<br /><ul><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=41.485413,-87.569374&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">My House</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago,il&ll=41.882254,-87.640547&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">Home office in Chicago</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=boca+raton,fl&ll=26.433256,-80.093272&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">My Del Ray Beach workplace</a> (back in '03)</li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=tucson,az&ll=32.216957,-110.878497&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">Tucson Office</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=dulles,va&ll=39.002817,-77.443721&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">Dulles</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=dulles,va&ll=38.949172,-77.422307&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">Dulles Apartment</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago,il&ll=41.882254,-87.640547&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">Tucson Apartment</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago,il&ll=41.948486,-87.655662&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">Wrigley Field</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=bushnell,il&ll=40.525281,-90.430012&spn=0.042057,0.061626&t=k&hl=en">Lake Wildwood -- Cornerstone Festival Grounds</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=washington,dc&ll=38.881044,-77.030897&spn=0.042057,0.061626&t=k&hl=en">The National Mall, Washington, DC</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=new+york,ny&ll=40.689411,-74.045266&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">The Statue of Liberty</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=st+louis,mo&ll=38.625097,-90.185480&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">The Arch</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=lake+buena+vista,fl&ll=28.419024,-81.581168&spn=0.005257,0.007703&t=k&hl=en">The Magic Kingdom</a></li><br /><li><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=peach+springs,az&ll=36.106567,-112.145691&spn=0.021029,0.030813&t=k&hl=en">The Grand Canyon</a></li><br /></ul>UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1112763711222549742005-04-06T01:00:00.000-04:002005-04-06T01:01:51.253-04:00Peter Jennings Diagnosed With Lung CancerStory <a href="http://abclocal.go.com/wls/news/040505_ap_en_jennings.html">here</a>.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1112725155195879422005-04-05T14:12:00.000-04:002005-04-05T14:19:15.196-04:00Conrad Engaged!First is was <a href="http://www.imao.us">FrankJ and SarahK</a>. Now <a href="http://decapolis.com/pages_/Staff.shtml">Conrad Tolosa and Julia Zulia</a> are engaged! Conrad makes the announcement <a href="http://decapolis.com/views_/pages/WhatstheDealwithConradandJ.shtml">here</a>.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1112368442031813992005-04-01T10:08:00.000-05:002005-04-01T10:14:27.083-05:00Family TragedyPlease pray for my extended family. My second cousin on my father's side, Charlene Hicks, <a href="http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,12720496%255E1702,00.html">was murdered yesterday with her husband, Richard.</a> They were missionaries in Guyana.<br /><br /><center><img src="http://members.aol.com/Jimband3/Hicks.jpg"></center>UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1112296239871168822005-03-31T14:03:00.000-05:002005-03-31T14:10:39.873-05:00Cornerstone Schedule ReleasedThe 2005 Cornerstone Festival Schedule is now available <a href="http://www.cornerstonefestival.com/bands.cfm">here</a>.<br /><br />Biggest scheduling conflict I've noticed so far:<br />Friday 7:40 PM -- Skillet<br />Friday 8:00 PM -- Hanover Saints<br />Friday 8:00 PM -- Life In the Way<br />Friday 8:15 PM -- The Huntingtons (farewell show)<br /><br />That's right. On Friday, July 1, I will have to find a way to be <em>four</em> places at once.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1111605498644132912005-03-23T11:45:00.000-05:002005-03-23T14:18:18.646-05:00Flatfoot 56 In Metromix ContestHey all! Go <a href="http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/music/mmx-050323-musicrocknvote1,0,1253288.story?coll=mmx-home_top_hedsh2o">here</a> and vote for <a href="http://www.flatfoot56.com">Flatfoot 56</a> in order to help them get some major recognition!UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1111007855134105292005-03-16T16:16:00.000-05:002005-03-16T16:17:35.136-05:00Tooth and Nail dealStill busy with work and everything else, but here's a quick deal:<br /><br />BestBuy.com is selling all Tooth and Nail CD's @ 2 for $15. Check it out <a href="http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?j=1&type=category&id=pcmcat55300050030">here</a>.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1110576175586800612005-03-11T16:21:00.000-05:002005-03-11T16:22:55.586-05:00Lack of UpdatesSorry for the lack of updates. I've been really busy both with work and personal life. And then when I try posting something here (which has happened twice this week), blogger/blogspot has gone down completely!<br /><br />So I'll be kinda surprised if this goes through. Anyways, hopefully next week I'll have a little more time to post.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1110048469116418202005-03-05T13:24:00.000-05:002005-03-05T13:47:49.116-05:00Autoblink UpdateThe guys at Searchguild have <a href="http://www.searchguild.com/autoblink/">updated the Autoblink code</a>, making it faster and adding an Amazon referral switch option. They've also created a new meta tag, currently unsupported by anyone, that they hope to convince tools like Autolink to honor.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1109962064206931082005-03-04T13:46:00.000-05:002005-03-04T13:47:44.206-05:00Venezuela Outsourcing ID's To Cuba<a href="http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=14935&only=yes">This</a> is unsettling.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1109958078327603862005-03-04T11:49:00.000-05:002005-03-04T12:41:18.333-05:00Maureen Jagmin Resigns<a href="http://hftp.blogspot.com/2005/03/sica-update.html">SICA UPDATE!</a><br /><br />The Sun-Times has the resignation story <a href="http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-sica04.html">here</a>.<br /><br />Maureen's husband, Gary Jagmin, made a very scary defense of his wife:<br /><blockquote><br />"It was an overheard conversation between possibly a man and wife," a visibly shaken Gary Jagmin said haltingly. He read a statement in a small board room packed with parents, reporters and school officials. "Should she be judged on what she says in the privacy of her own home, speaking to her husband, in a private conversation?"<br /><br />He told the board he couldn't tell the context of the conversation from the transcript printed in Tuesday's Sun-Times. He also suggested the caller may have been expressing someone else's opinion, and questioned how the recording ended up on the Sun-Times voice mail.<br /><br />He asked the board to delay accepting his wife's resignation until she and her lawyer reviewed the recording. But the board already had accepted the resignation.<br /><br />Gary Jagmin said his wife was a dedicated board member. "Her actions speak louder than her private conversations," he said.<br /></blockquote><br />Someone (<a href="http://en.thinkexist.com/quotation/our_character_is_what_we_do_when_we_think_no_one/208050.html">maybe H. Jackson Brown, Jr.</a>) once said, "Our character is what we do when we think no one is looking." The conversation caught on the Sun-Times voicemail was a candid look at Maureen Jagmin's character and beliefs, and thus just as important -- if not more so -- as her public actions.<br /><br />But her public actions do show character. For instance, she continues to deny that she is the voice in the recording. Since all the other facts in the matter point to her as the culprit -- the caller ID, the matching names in the recording, her resignation, and the fact that her <em>own husband</em> basically admitted to it by defending her privacy to say such things -- all indications are that her denial is merely an attempt to save face. The right thing to do would be to own up to the responsibility and publicly apologize to the schools she slandered, as the Lincoln-Way school board has already done.<br /><br />Should she be fired or charged for what she said? No, and she wasn't. Freedom of speech extends to statements such as these, and as a (presumably elected) public official, she can't be forcibly removed from office for making such statements. But though perfectly legal, what she said was morally reprehensible, her actions after the fact have been shortsightedly self-serving, and her husband's defense is ethically bankrupt.UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7022408.post-1109870956994756972005-03-03T11:45:00.000-05:002005-03-03T12:29:17.000-05:00Curtailing My Freedom Of SpeechCheck out <a href="http://news.com.com/The+coming+crackdown+on+blogging/2008-1028_3-5597079.html?tag=st.prev">this</a> interview with Federal Election Commissioner Bradley Smith, titled "The Coming Crackdown On Blogging". The FEC is planning to apply the McCain-Feingold bill to blogs.<br /><br />What does this mean? Well, McCain-Feingold restricts the contributions from corporations and individuals to political campaigns. In the case of websites and blogs, the FEC is planning to judge "contributions" in interesting ways:<br /><blockquote><br /><strong>How can the government place a value on a blog that praises some politician? </strong><br />How do we measure that? Design fees, that sort of thing? The FEC did an advisory opinion in the late 1990s (in the Leo Smith case) that I don't think we'd hold to today, saying that if you owned a computer, you'd have to calculate what percentage of the computer cost and electricity went to political advocacy. <br /><br />It seems absurd, but that's what the commission did. And that's the direction Judge Kollar-Kotelly would have us move in. Line drawing is going to be an inherently very difficult task. And then we'll be pushed to go further. Why can this person do it, but not that person? <br /><br /><strong>How about a hyperlink? Is it worth a penny, or a dollar, to a campaign? </strong><br />I don't know. But I'll tell you this. One thing the commission has argued over, debated, wrestled with, is how to value assistance to a campaign. <br /><br />Corporations aren't allowed to donate to campaigns. Suppose a corporation devotes 20 minutes of a secretary's time and $30 in postage to sending out letters for an executive. As a result, the campaign raises $35,000. Do we value the violation on the amount of corporate resources actually spent, maybe $40, or the $35,000 actually raised? The commission has usually taken the view that we value it by the amount raised. It's still going to be difficult to value the link, but the value of the link will go up very quickly. <br /><br />. . .<br /><br /><strong>If Congress doesn't change the law, what kind of activities will the FEC have to target? </strong><br />We're talking about any decision by an individual to put a link (to a political candidate) on their home page, set up a blog, send out mass e-mails, any kind of activity that can be done on the Internet. <br /><br />Again, blogging could also get us into issues about online journals and non-online journals. Why should CNET get an exemption but not an informal blog? Why should Salon or Slate get an exemption? Should Nytimes.com and Opinionjournal.com get an exemption but not online sites, just because the newspapers have a print edition as well? <br /><br />. . .<br /><br /><strong>So if you're using text that the campaign sends you, and you're reproducing it on your blog or forwarding it to a mailing list, you could be in trouble?</strong><br />Yes. In fact, the regulations are very specific that reproducing a campaign's material is a reproduction for purpose of triggering the law. That'll count as an expenditure that counts against campaign finance law. <br /></blockquote><br />And this will apply to <a href="http://hftp.blogspot.com">Heroes from the Past</a>, although it's questionable whether the FEC will target such a small blog as this. If I reproduce campaign literature, <em>even if it is with permission and correctly attributed</em>, I may be breaking McCain-Feingold. If I <em>hyperlink to George Bush's campaign website</em>, I may be breaking McCain-Feingold. If I ever <em>incorporate myself</em> (which is a real possibility, longterm) and do <em>any</em> of this, I will probably be breaking McCain-Feingold.<br /><br />Whatever happened to free speech in this country?<br /><br />BTW -- who is at least partially to blame?<br /><blockquote><br />In 2002, the FEC exempted the Internet by a 4-2 vote, but U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly last fall overturned that decision. "The commission's exclusion of Internet communications from the coordinated communications regulation severely undermines" the campaign finance law's purposes, Kollar-Kotelly wrote. <br /><br />Smith and the other two Republican commissioners wanted to appeal the Internet-related sections. But because they couldn't get the three Democrats to go along with them, what Smith describes as a "bizarre" regulatory process now is under way.<br /></blockquote>UndercoverPunkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06824089647913274188noreply@blogger.com0