I didn’t watch the acceptance speech Obama gave in ancient Greece Denver tonight, but not to fear, I had a friend who was watching it with a few of his friends, and they were good enough to record their observations for posterity.  He passed it on to me, so I in turn pass this on to you:¹

[20:59] A.Friend: earlier, they showed the stadium and were talking how many people were there — that he was giving the speech in front of 85000 people and they’d likely have to turn thousands away.  but when they showed wide angle views of stadium, even though there were people everywhere in the place, the were so thin in places that you could see the color of the seating in various sections.  Sure they could still be packing them in, but it was /NOT/ even close to being packed. 

[21:00] Me: somebody mentioned that the crowds looked like the people you’d see at an infomercial audience cheering wildly (and inanely) at any damned thing

[21:00] A.Friend: haha

[21:00] A.Friend: yeah mostly.  you could see them notice the camera and perk up

[21:00] Me: “hi, I’m on TV and cheering FOR NO GOOD REASON!  YAY!!”

[21:16] A.Friend: lol “with great humility” obama says he accepts nomination — great humility, as he felt the need to move /his/ speech to a giant stage in the middle of a football field because the other place wasn’t big enough to contain his ego

[21:30] A.Friend: today is the 45th anniversary of mlk’s “i have a dream” speech.

[21:31] Me: yeah - it’s no accident he’s standing in front of a facsimile of the white house, and speaking on the anniversary of MLK

[21:32] Me: omg, he’s back to the Change thing

[21:33] A.Friend: that’s all he’s got — change.  if he stopped saying that, people would forget what he’s about.

[21:34] A.Friend: nice to know in 10 years we’ll be oil free.  nice.

[21:34] Me: not driving isn’t an answer for me

Both Pelosi and Biden who were chastised by Catholic Archbishops for their prolife stances show no signs of contrition, and continue to insist their positions are not controversial.

First, Biden, who claims that his beliefs may not be in line, but it is OK, because the church doesn’t really care ¹:

Joe Biden supposedly will attract Catholics to the Democratic ticket, but not if he follows Pope Nancy Pelosi for doctrinal guidance.  In a profile of Biden for the Christian Science Monitor, Biden credits his Catholicism for his focus on “abuse of power”, but shrugs off the abortion debate as a minor controversy.  He even goes on to tell Gail Russell Chaddock that his views on social issues fall completely within Catholic doctrine:

“The animating principle of my faith, as taught to me by church and home, was that the cardinal sin was abuse of power,” he said in an interview with the Monitor. “It was not only required as a good Catholic to abhor and avoid abuse of power, but to do something to end that abuse.”

The issues that have most engaged Biden in public life draw on those teachings, from halting violence against women to genocide. At a personal level, his faith provides him peace, he says. “I get comfort from carrying my rosary, going to mass every Sunday. It’s my time alone,” he says.

But the interface of faith and policy has long been problematic for Catholic presidential hopefuls. Governor Smith faced withering criticism over whether Catholic politicians are obliged by their church to take policy orders from Rome. John F. Kennedy famously disavowed “outside religious pressures or dictates,” swept the Catholic vote, and won the presidency. By the time another J.F.K. from Massachusetts ran for president in 2004, the ground had shifted. Sen. John F. Kerry lost the Catholic vote because many of his faith questioned whether he was Catholic enough, given his strong support for abortion rights.

OK, I admit, that title almost reads like some lame joke lead in ( a priest and abortionist and a democrat walked into a bar and…..).

But believe it or not, it is news. Now, as a disclaimer, I am not promoting a stand on abortion here, this is merely about Democrats who are Catholic.

It started with this story a few days ago, where Nancy Pelosi apparently decided to speak authoritatively on Catholic doctrine:¹

I’m always astounded as to the extent of deception in which pro-choice Catholics indulge themselves, both inwardly and outwardly, to justify their positions. Perhaps there is no balder example of this than Nancy Pelosi attempting to spin the Catholic doctrine on human life today on Meet the Press. Pelosi argues that the Catholic position on human life only developed in the last 50 years and that it doesn’t impact abortion in any case:

REP. PELOSI: I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. And Senator-St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child-first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester.

 

There’s very clear distinctions. This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, carefulconsideration of all factors and-to-that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god. And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins. As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…

MR. BROKAW: The Catholic Church at the moment feels very strongly that it…

REP. PELOSI: I understand that.

MR. BROKAW: …begins at the point of conception.

Washington has a plethora of industry, but there are two names that pretty much come to people’s minds when they think of the state:  Boeing and Microsoft.  I have worked for both, and while I have mentioned my high tech industry experiences, I don’t talk about Boeing much.

I hired on to the 777 plant in Everett in 1996, about a year and a half after I left the Air Force.

Prior to my hiring on, in 1995, I began to pay attention to Boeing.  It was just prior to Christmas in 1995.  I heard the stories and saw the TV reports.  Christmas shopping at the Auburn Super Mall we drove past the picket lines.

I noticed something.  Boeing had offered them a new contract at around 45 days and they were voting on it.  A person labeled as a Union Officer came on TV expressing his optimism.  The membership flatly rejected it.  Shortly afterward, the same guy spoke on TV about how he had been pretty sure the Members would reject it.

I admit, I laughed.  I figured if that was the kind of dufas they elected, oh well.

The strike went another 3 weeks or so finally ending at 69 days.

When I hired on in 1996, the veterans and old timers were still crowing about that strike.

I mentioned to one what I had noticed, and he nodded sagely, and told me a startling accusation:  the union was in cahoots with Boeing management and the strike had been engineered deliberately. 

NOTE: Obviously I need to add the disclaimer, this is not my theory, but that of a veteran employee.

So intrigued (hey it beat working) I asked him to explain.  He claimed that Boeing as behind in planning and production on the 777, and rather then pay penalties for delays, they could take advantage of a 45 day extension on contracts that was allowed during - you guessed it -  contract disputes.

So, he claimed that Boeing deliberately offered a crappy contract on day one, and forced the strike.  Then, around day 45, when they lost the extension, they offered the real contract.

Obama and his flock of acolytes have consistently portrayed him as the younger, hipper candidate.  The candidate of change.  The fresh wind in the sour air of politics, the new voice.  Someone not a part of politics as usual.

They have charged that John McCain is the old man, the voice of stagnation.  An old hide bound white guy in a sea of politics ruled by old white men.  A guy who has made a career out of politics as usual, and partisan bickering.

So it comes as no shock to learn that Obama has taken the fresh, bold and utterly hipper step of choosing a running mate who is an old white man, who has made a career out of politics as usual and partisan bickering.

Finally:  Change we can believe in. 

Why?  Frankly, because he wants to win.  Now, granted that Hillary has more support, and a ticket with her might be the golden ticket for a sure win, but imagine being president and constantly having to watch your back, waiting for the chance for her and Bill to stick a (figuratively speaking only here) knife into it.  Hillary is just too ambitious.

I found this to be an interesting and accurate assessment by Ron Fournier(AP):¹

Analysis: Biden pick shows lack of confidence

The candidate of change went with the status quo.

In picking Sen. Joe Biden to be his running mate, Barack Obama sought to shore up his weakness — inexperience in office and on foreign policy — rather than underscore his strength as a new-generation candidate defying political conventions.

He picked a 35-year veteran of the Senate — the ultimate insider — rather than a candidate from outside Washington, such as Govs. Tim Kaine of Virginia or Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas; or from outside his party, such as Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska; or from outside the mostly white male club of vice presidential candidates Hillary Rodham Clinton didn’t even make his short list.

Let’s be honest, at my age, the drinking age isn’t anything I really care about.  I think I have been carded once in the last 10 or 15 years.

But i do have children, two of which are still under the age of 21, so for their sake, and for the unnamed hoard of 18-20 year olds, I want to visit the issue.

What brings this into focus is the recent call to raise the drinking age back up, presented by a coalition of college professors.¹

College chiefs urge new debate on drinking age

College presidents from about 100 of the nation’s best-known universities, including Duke, Dartmouth and Ohio State, are calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18, saying current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking on campus.

Men pour beer on a drunken student during Spring Break on South Padre Island, Texas.

The movement called the Amethyst Initiative began quietly recruiting presidents more than a year ago to provoke national debate about the drinking age.

“This is a law that is routinely evaded,” said John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College in Vermont who started the organization. “It is a law that the people at whom it is directed believe is unjust and unfair and discriminatory.”

Other prominent schools in the group include Syracuse, Tufts, Colgate, Kenyon and Morehouse.

Of course the debate has its opponants.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving says lowering the drinking age would lead to more fatal car crashes. It accuses the presidents of misrepresenting science and looking for an easy way out of an inconvenient problem.

Now, I can understand their wanting to be a part of the deate and that they are passionate.  What sucks is that MADD had to take the low road:

MADD officials are even urging parents to think carefully about the safety of colleges whose presidents have signed on.

Via Orb:¹

08/19/2008 22:00 PACIFIC

SEATTLE, WA - ORBUSMAX EXCLUSIVE

***** DID OBAMA SUPPORTER BREAK SCHOOL POLICY AND/OR ELECTION LAW ON MONDAY AND PRIMARY ELECTION TUESDAY (8/18-8/19)? *****

The Seattle Public school system may be finding itself in more hot water, following dustups over last fall’s “Myth Of Thanksgiving”, and last summer’s “Exploring White Privilege”. A reliable source has told ORBUSMAX that at least one Obama supporter was caught openly selling Obama for President t-shirts, “on Seattle Public School premises during an official School District Training” for teachers, yesterday and today, at the Aki Kurose Middle school.

The source says they overheard the Obama supporter being told by an attendee of the training on Monday that the table display was inappropriate and may be in violation of school policy, but nonetheless the Obama supporter returned on Tuesday and once again set up the display with the t-shirts for sale. It appears school officials made no attempt to stop or remove the display either day.

(#1 - See SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS - LEVY OR ELECTION INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION, #4, at http://www.seattleschools.org/area/policies/e/E22.00.pdf - “Students, teachers, and administrators may not use school facilities to make or display election propaganda”. “Signs, memoranda, or the like, stating the reasons why voters should cast their votes for or against a particular ballot issue or candidate cannot be made at school, cannot be made with school materials, and cannot be displayed at school.” )

(#2 – See Seattle Public Schools Policy E02.01 on “COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES”, at http://www.seattleschools.org/area/policies/e/E02.01.pdf: Certain Corporate Support or Activity Prohibited. No corporate support or activity will be permitted in the District or in the schools that: … f. Promotes or opposes any political candidate or ballot proposition )

ELECTION LAW VIOLATION?

Aki Kurose also served as an official polling place for the Washington State primary held Tuesday. The source went on to say “although the Obama display was not next to the main polling place entrance, there were undoubtedly some voters who walked by the Obama display on their way to the polls today”.

The abortion debate took an interesting turn.

Obama has been under fire for a while over his prior votes on abortion so it was obvious that would come up in the Saddleback interview.

When asked when a fetus gains human rights status, Obama took a clear stand:  Ask someone else.  ¹

Obama says pointed abortion query “above his pay grade”

DALLAS - U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama side-stepped a pointed query about abortion on Saturday by “mega-pastor” Rick Warren during a televised forum.

Asked at what point a baby gets “human rights,” Obama, who strongly supports abortion rights, said: “… whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question  with specificity … is above my pay grade.”

He went on to reiterate his view that it was important to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.

He is right in the sense that the root issue of abortion is unwanted pregnancies.  But that does not change the fact that you still need to answer the question and define the nature of life if you want to justify abortion.

The issue at hand is when an abortion is performed and the fetus is delivered alive.  A law requiring medical care to be given to such fetuses was voted down with the help of Obama.  In fact he opposed it directly for three years.

The issue seems pretty simple really.  if life begins at birth, a failed abortion that results in a live “birth” qualifies.  At the least some attempt should be made to save the life,

Obama’s response to his gaffe has been his typical tap dance nuance.²

Did you?

(obviously this is addressed to Washington State voters, today is our primary) 

We laid our beloved grandmother to rest yesterday.  She died at the age of 99, leaving 12 children, many grandchildren, and even great and great great grandchildren grieving for her loss.

Our family grieves in their own way, as all families do.  Like many we love to celebrate the life the person lived, not simply wail and moan over their death.

Don’t get me wrong.  There were tears a plenty when the notice of her death went out.  At the viewing and the memorial service there were many tears falling.  As two of my cousins sang the song grandmother requested, the tears were there.  As the granddaughters chorus sang another favorite, it was very emotional.

As one of the 8 grandsons asked to be pallbearer, I escorted her to the hearse and then helped carry her to the grave site.  I was mostly fine, really, until my uncle David and cousin Natalie’s husband Corrie played their bagpipes.  I don’t know the name of the first song they piped, but the second was my absolute favorite song on pipes, Amazing Grace.  Even on a good day, Amazing Grace on pipes reduces me to jello, and in this case, the tears flowed freely.

Tears not withstanding, the joy of her life was overwhelming.  Truly, she was remarkable, and it leaves me in awe thinking of the span of her life. 

Born in 1909, she was a young child when WW1 concluded. She was a young married woman raising children during the Great Depression.   She was a mother of 6 during WW2, and had 13 children by the age of 44.  At 45, she was San Jose California’s Mother of the Year, a testimony to her well known love of volunteer and community work.

In 1968, she became a widow, but it didn’t stop her even as she raised her last couple of teenage boys alone.