For those who may not have read any of my previous writings, I should explain that I am a Christian, a rather devout one I think, though I know I am not doing all I could or should be doing for God, and it’s all because of where my head is at. I’m always talking in my journal about how I’m a Christian, trying to be a man of God, and trying to follow the path that Jesus paved for me to follow, in His footsteps. The Book of James dwells on this somewhat, talking about how a true Christian can be spotted by his deeds, and if those deeds are dead, so is the faith. No, your deeds will not get you into heaven; you cannot earn your way there. Heaven if given by grace, through belief in Christ, yet there is more to it than that, because demons believe as well, and they, of course, are not going to heaven. There must be more than just hollow belief – there must be trust and love and a relationship with Jesus Christ, and our deeds will be a reflection of all that. He will know us by our fruit. (See Matthew 3:10, 7:20, 12:33, John 15:2, 15:16, Galatians 5:22, 23, Phillipians 1:11) Yet I see a chasm between me and God, and why not? This concept is mentioned throughout the New Testament and in numerous Christian songs whenever Jesus is painted as a Bridge. We are not God, and we are separated from Him by our sin, and Jesus is the Bridge that crosses that chasm.

But am I seeing a gap where none exists any longer? As a believer, I become a new man in Christ. Christ has helped me cross this gulf between me and God, and yet I’m still living and acting as if the break is still there, talking about how I’m still trying to be a man of God. Well, if I truly believe, then I already am a man of God, and I just need to let that continue to grow. As much as unbelievers may see us Christians as exclusionary, the fact is that this is how God designed it. As a believer, I am saved. Can I help it if that’s exclusionary? Can I help it if they have not made the leap as I have? It’s up to each individual. This is the bed I’ve made. They will have to lay in their own.

This is what one of our interim pastors talked about this month at church, and I found it to be wonderfully enlightening. He painted the same picture of a Christian trying to be godlier, without even realizing that he already is godly. He explained how there is nothing anymore separating God and me, and that instead of looking at God across a chasm, God and I are on the same side looking across it at the rest of the unsaved world. The point is that God and I are on the same side. We have been ever since I accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior. All I really need to do now is to realize this, the rest will come as a result.

Our pastor gave a great analogy. He said in one of his visits to a foreign country, he was just blown away by the local elephant show. These elephants performed and gave rides and painted pictures, and he was amazed, and perhaps a little leery, wondering if these elephants might someday snap and go berserk. Yet, as he explained, there’s little danger of that happening. You see, these elephants are trained from a very young age. They would put a shackle and chain abound the elephant’s foot, and the elephant could never go more than just a couple feet from where it was tethered. Over time, these trainers discovered that if they removed the chain but left the shackle, the elephant would still never go more than a couple of feet from its current position. So in the elephant’s mind, it was still shackled, even though, truthfully, it was free. For us, when we become Christians, when we believe, the chain is, in effect, cut, yet we still feel the shackle, and still imagine the chain. We start out with a chasm between ourselves and God, but when we become born again, Jesus bridges that gap, and we find ourselves with God, yet mentally, we still picture ourselves on the other side of the canyon. This is a hard thing to get past. After all, we’re still here on earth, the playground of Satan, intermixing with all the unsaved sinners, making wrong choices, even sinning still, and following in Jesus’ footsteps only little by little, bit by bit. Yet we grow as Christians the more we realize that the chasm that separated us from God no longer exists, and that we are free spirits in Christ Jesus.

Another interim pastor gave a great sermon concerning a subject I’m fascinated by, namely dealing with the nature of choice. In his sermon, he defined our choices as being one of three: Predetermined by God, moral, and personal, and then went on to discuss the meaning of this versus the meaning of the undefined moral relativism of this world, and to do so, he used an analogy every bit as thought provoking as the other pastor’s analogy about the elephants.

On everybody’s program, he printed the image of a ruler, and asked us to imagine that, with this ruler, he was going to have us build a bookcase. Then he told us that the measurements on everybody’s rulers were slightly different, and that there were actually three different rulers used. No further explanation was necessary, for I got the point loud and clear, yet he explained: With three different rulers, all with slightly different measurements, the bookcase would most likely turn out to be a disaster. What is needed is a consensus, an absolute, an agreement that the measurements all be the same. In Paris, there exists a Bureau of Weights and Measures whose job it is to maintain the absolutes of measurement, so that all rulers use the same dimensions, so that things built use the same proportions. If a mile is different to one person than another, how would we ever make a map? If two different people use two different thermometers, how will we ever make any kind of definitive decisions on the weather? And his ultimate point? The same kind of thing applies to truth. Relative truth is never definitive and can change on a whim, but absolute truth doesn’t change, and remains the same for everyone, every time.

I myself liken this to a helium balloon. We experienced a few deaths in the family recently, and my sister had her daughters write messages to their grandpa on helium balloons and then let them go into the wind. We did the same on a departed friend’s birthday last year, and the balloons went wherever the wind took them. Liberals are like this. Just like those balloons, they are free to go wherever the winds take them. For Christians, however, God imposes moral boundaries and absolute truths that do not shift with the winds. Christians are still like those helium balloons, yet they are tethered to God. They are free to shift with the winds just like the untethered helium balloons, moving around in the winds of change and time, yet able to go only so far because they remained tethered to God’s rock solid, absolute foundation. So while the liberals can shift with changing tides, we Christians should remain anchored to our Rock, our Safe Harbor. And we should still be happy, and unapologetic, to do so. So why are we not? Why are we always trying to fall in line with the politico correctos over on the left? Why are we ashamed to say we are saved in Christ, or do we pick on those who aren’t afraid or ashamed to say it? Why do I have to defend myself at work against the two men there who claim to be my Christian brothers? Why are they judging me and my walk as a Christian? Why are they floating in the wind with all the untethered liberals, looking down at me because I choose to remain tethered to God?

Well, nobody said it would be easy. In fact, by all accounts, this Christian walk, especially in the here and now on the late, great planet earth, is quite possibly the most conflicting walk we could choose to take. It’s not a lovely stroll through a rosy, sunny park, let me tell you, but more of a mad dash through a hostile battlefield, with bullets ripping through the air. What we need in this walk here is protection. In both Superman and Superman Returns, there are scenes where Superman keeps walking while bullets flip off his chest like they weren’t even there. That’s what we need. We need Superman, and it’s telling that in both these films, Superman is used several times as a deliberate Biblical allegory for Jesus Christ. Because what we need here in our walk with God is Superman, and that’s exactly what we get in Christ, only He’s real. In Superman Returns, Lois Lane wrote an article called “Why the World Doesn’t Need Superman,” echoing the liberals’ sentiments about Jesus. There are lots of analogies we could derive from this, yet nothing seems to trump the fact that, in the end, no matter how cynical and self-righteous Lois may have become, no matter how much the world had moved on, they still needed Superman to save them. Well, the same thing applies here. No matter how cynical and self-righteous the world may have become, no matter how much they may have moved on, they still need Jesus to save them.

They always will.

Are we all we can be for God? What keeps us from being all we can be? What do we do with others, or ourselves, when we think we are being weak? Should we love them or judge them, and should we love or judge ourselves?

This Christian religion is difficult to grasp when all is said and done. Oh sure, we can cut it down to the most basic elements: John 3:16 is one of the most famous Bible verses because, as the bible scholars say, it states what this religion is all about: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” This is simple: Believe in Jesus and live forever with Him in paradise. In another Bible verse, Matthew 22:37, and repeated in Mark 12:30-33, someone asks Jesus what the most important commandment is, and He replies to love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength. He then says that a second commandment is as important as the first: Love your neighbors as yourself. Again, it’s simple: Love God, Love your neighbors, love yourself.

Yet the Bible is made up of 66 books, and we’ve only covered a few verses. Things don’t really remain that simple. In fact, if you really get into it, it can get rather complicated. If you ever read CS Lewis’ non-fiction writings, you’d know what I mean. Consider, for instance, that I used the word “religion” twice in the above paragraph. I’m actually uncomfortable using that word, and many true Christians would take offense. That’s because we really don’t feel like Christianity is a religion, but more of a belief, or better yet, a relationship.

How about our belief in Jesus saving us? At church and our Sunday night group, we’ve been going over the book of James, and guess what it says in James 2:19-20? “You say you have faith, for you believe that there is one God. Good for you! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble in terror. How foolish! Can’t you see that faith without good deeds is useless?” (NLT) Basically what James, Jesus’ brother, is saying here, is that faith without good deeds is a dead faith and that if you proclaim Jesus with your mouth but don’t follow it up with good deeds, then you don’t truly believe and are not truly Christian. “Just as the body is dead without breath, so also faith is dead without good works.” (James 2:26). Listen to Jesus’ words from Luke 13:24-27: “Work hard to enter the narrow door to God’s Kingdom, for many will try to enter but will fail. When the master of the house has locked the door, it will be too late. You will stand outside knocking and pleading, ‘Lord, open the door for us!’ But he will reply, ‘I don’t know you or where you come from.’ Then you will say, ‘But we ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.’ And he will reply, ‘I tell you, I don’t know you or where you come from. Get away from me, all you who do evil.’” This would seem to say that some people who fully expect to spend eternity in heaven with Jesus will be shocked when they are turned away, with Jesus saying he does not know them. Some of my co-workers who are so light in their faith that I wouldn’t even know they were Christian if I went strictly by their lifestyles would seem to fall into this category, but then, parts of the Bible say I’m not supposed to judge them. Still others were taking these passages to mean that believing in Jesus is not enough, and that you can earn your way into heaven by doing good works. Wrong! What these passages are saying is that you are saved by God’s grace, and once saved, your actions will follow suit, and that if they don’t, then you were not really saved anyway because you do not really believe.

You see how confusing it can start to become the more you get into the word?

I revealed above that Jesus wants us to “love our neighbor as ourselves.” Yet even this simple directive can become complicated quite quickly. How are we supposed to feel about those we go to war with? How are we to feel about capital punishment? If we had the chance to kill Hitler before he rose to power, when he was just an innocent infant, would we do it? It seems with this directive to “love our neighbor as ourselves” that God wants us to “be a friend of the world.” What, then, are we to make of this quote from James 4:4: “Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.”? The answer, of course, is to be enough of a friend to save others and steer them towards God, but without condoning or engaging in sin. If you’re going to save strippers and prostitutes, we can’t A) shun them or B) do what they do. We must reach out to them, and that requires a certain amount of understanding and compassion. As the pastor of my church said recently, the key to understanding what God wants from us is to choose humility, and to humble ourselves before the Lord, for He is ultimate greatness and love and compassion, and we are like specs of dust in His presence, yet He still loves us with a love that is as big as He is, and He desires our friendship.

These questions we ask may be answered the more we get into God’s word and the more we get to know Jesus, yet the fact that they pop up and need addressing shows how complicated it can become. Putting faith in Jesus Christ is only the first step on a long road, a road littered with lots of twists and turns…and questions.

A neighbor of ours who claims to be Christian has been trying to justify her belief and her church with my mom lately. It’s a liberal church that supports the liberal agenda of accepting all people regardless of their lack of Christian morality, and one that seems to question our place as Christians among all the other religions of the world, and to question the exclusionary doctrine of Jesus saying He is the only way. They’ve got our neighbor questioning the existence of hell. My uncle had previously put similar questions to me, and truthfully, I pondered them. But in the end, the choice I’ve made is to believe in Jesus and the Christian Bible. If my neighbor feels like she has to justify her beliefs and her church to Mom, then perhaps there’s something there tugging at her that makes her feel the need to justify them. She wouldn’t feel this need if she were satisfied with it, would she?

All the people I work with are at wildly different levels; from non-believers to people toying with it to those who think they are Christian but really aren’t since they hold the same views as the rest of this world, to those who are a bit more committed in following Christ. Even getting past all of them and getting closer to people who are more devoutly committed, such as the people who attend our church and my small church groups, they sometimes still tend to have their heads turned by the liberal mindset of this world. Some of them have made statements they were spoon-fed by the liberals about the war, using some of the most simple and basic arguments the liberals try to foster upon the unthinking public, like “there were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq,” “What ties did Iraq have with Al Quada?”, “It’s a war for oil,” and “Why are we in Afghanistan and Iraq when there are worse things going on in places like Iran and North Korea?” Some of their minds have been turned on occasion by the liberal left as they spout all the stuff their brains have been filled with concerning the liberals’ hatred of President Bush. Some of them have started spouting some of this simplistic anti-war rhetoric like a programmed computer.

But part of what makes all of this so complicated and intricate is simply this: After all I’ve just written and all I know about Christianity and the other world religions and politics and the difference between liberals and conservatives, I still have to question everything, because even after all of this, I must stop for a moment and ask: Are any of these more liberal Christians in my small groups at least partly right? And what about those liberal churches that support things like homosexuality: I know they are wrong to say God approves of gay relationships, but are we conservative Christians too unforgiving and stringent, so much so that we are pushing these sinners who God loves closer to the fires of hell? In this light, there is only one Person you can turn to. I’ll bet you can guess who it is.

Every December, we seem to watch a glut of Christmas movies, and despite the fact that I’ve named many of them as favorite movies in my journal, such as The Chronicles of Narnia, The Polar Express, and A Christmas Story, there’s still a whole bunch I haven’t, such as National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation, It’s a Wonderful Life, Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas, Elf, or even a new one I saw for the first time called Surviving Christmas. I liked them all, even Surviving Christmas, yet it should be noted these movies are listed in order of best to worst (and if you take exception to the fact that I picked National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation over It’s a Wonderful Life or How the Grinch Stole Christmas over Elf, keep in mind that this is 2006, not 1946, and that the way I’ve placed them on this list is still somewhat debatable).

The Nativity Story is definitely another Christmas movie for the plus column. Despite some negative publicity about Hollywood trying to cash in on the Christian crowd with product designed for them, or the fact that the actress playing the virgin Mary, Keisha Castle-Hughes, was a pregnant teen in real life and was not invited to be part of the marketing campaign, The Nativity Story still stands as quite a remarkable movie, and definitely one of the best Christmas movies I’ve seen. When Hollywood decides to put its mind to it (and its money, and its writers and special effects and cinematographers) I’m actually amazed that they can still make a movie that glorifies God. And why not? Sometimes God works in mysterious ways. If this movie reaches at least one person with the message that Jesus is the Christ, the Savior of mankind, and thereby saves that person’s soul, then it will all be worth it, regardless of some of this negative publicity.

My sister got me a movie called End of the Spear for Christmas, and it was a powerful movie as well, telling the true story of a group of Christians who were brutally butchered by the Waodani tribe in the Amazon jungles. Later, the Waodani man who murdered the leader became a believer and even, amazingly, developed a friendship with the man’s grown son. After marveling at the compelling story and acting (and it was a very well put together movie), my sister discovered that the man who played both the murdered Christian leader and his grown son, Chad Allen, is apparently in real life, a homosexual supporting many gay causes.  (I'd include the html, but it takes you to a gay site, of course.)  Perhaps that may be why the people who released this film, 20^th Century Fox and Every Tribe Entertainment, seem to have downplayed him in the marketing. The DVD for it doesn’t have his picture anywhere on it, on the front or the back, though they show several pictures of the Waodani and the man’s wife and son. My point is, does it really matter when all is said and done? Does the fact that Chad Allen is gay or that Keisha Castle-Hughes is a pregnant teen out of wedlock change the overall message of these movies? Not at all. In fact, you have to do a certain amount of research to even know such things about these actors. A normal person going to a theater, picking these movies off a video shelf, or ordering them over a cable or satellite service doesn’t necessarily know all the background information, and doesn’t need to know it. In fact, it’s better if they don’t.

As far as Christian product goes, I’d put The Nativity Story up against just about any of them. Despite the fact that this is pure Hollywood merchandise, it manages, through expert use of all the elements of film, to rise above that moniker to become art. I mean, even Michelangelo had to please his patrons, yet still managed to make some stunning classics. Art doesn’t have to be just product simply because business and money are part of the schematics.

On a side-note, being a confirmed Trekkie (something I’m not always wholly proud of), I’m glad to see that some Star Trek actors can make a career for themselves outside of that typecasting sci-fi show. That’s Alexander Siddig, Dr. Bashir from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, who keeps showing up as the Angel Gabriel (and, I might add, he’s also on the new season of 24). I’m sure my family was thoroughly embarrassed when I just had to lean over in the movie theater and tell them, “Hey, that’s Dr. Bashir!”

“Mr. Schwartz, we don’t have that kind of medicine,” the doctor told Sherwood Schwartz, creator of Gilligan’s Island, proving that Alan Hale was a generous man who loved people and children.  In real life, he used his celebrity to play a part bigger than his character.

In Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal Lechter called Clarice after his escape and said he wouldn’t be paying her a visit because, as he explained, the world was better with her in it. Although I could say the same thing about a lot of people, I’d also have to say it about some of the cast from Gilligan’s Island. You heard me. I’m talking about that show the critics have always loved to rake over the coals as being completely trivial and ultimately unimportant (and most people on this website would do the same, for in fact, this show and these actors really have nothing to do with securing financial portfolios or making a political commitment). Yet this show, and some of these actors, had merit. They cared about the world in a different way because they really cared about people. They understood, as Tina Louise and the critics on the whole did not, the appeal of Gilligan’s Island, the wholly positive force it was and could be, and the good to which it could be put. It was innocent, from a world gone by, something you can’t say about today’s sitcoms. Gilligan’s Island was mirth and laughter, and that’s all it ever had to be in order for it and its cast to work their healing magic upon the world. It always amazes me the way critics could praise the likes of Charlie Chaplin and The Marx Brothers and yet rake Gilligan’s Island over the coals. Could it be they just don’t get it? Could it be they don’t like humor after all, and liked Chaplin just for some of the social issues some of his short silent movies addressed? I’m not even saying Gilligan’s Island is completely devoid of such things, yet what about humor for the sake of humor? What about Gilligan and Skipper falling all over themselves as they try to use hammocks? Is there value in that? The answer? You bet. Just listen to this story from Sherwood Schwartz about Alan Hale, Jr., which he relates in the commentary track for the original pilot episode:

"Alan Hale was such a warm, wonderful man, and I used to go with him to Children’s Hospital where I have a dedicated room there… But these guys, particularly Alan Hale, well, I’d go there with him and since…most of the kids are pretty sick, you couldn’t gather them around in one place, so we’d go room by room and just visit the kids. And… we went to a room where there was a kid that had just come from recovery having a kidney removed for some medical reason… and the doctor said, “Okay, he’s coming around now…” And his eyes opened and he looked down at the base of the bed and…he saw Alan Hale - he was always dressed just like this - and he said, “Skipper?” and I said to myself I think he thought he died and went to Gilligan’s Island. And this kid smiled, ‘cause then Alan Hale said to him, “The Skipper’s here with you son, and everything is going to be okay now.” And the doctor said, “Mr. Schwartz... we don’t have that kind of medicine. He has now put this boy a day or two ahead of his recovery, just by being here and talking to him.” And the kid was now asleep with a big smile on his face. Performers should understand how important they are, whether it’s sports figures or whatever they are."

I wholeheartedly agree, and it’s something many celebrities don’t quite understand or have time for. It’s something Tina Louise and the negative critics of Gilligan’s Island have never understood. The jury’s out on Natalie Schaffer and Jim Backus because I haven’t researched it, but there’s no question that these other four understand – Alan Hale, Bob Denver, Dawn Wells, and Russell Johnson. Russell Johnson wrote a book about the magic of this show, and I’ve heard stories about Bob Denver and Dawn Wells traveling the country bringing joy to their fans in much a similar fashion. They all understand the power of celebrity to bring people together in love and heal not just sick individuals, but a sick nation. They understand that if there’s any kind of a purpose at all for something like Gilligan’s Island, it is something of this nature, to bring love and laughter to the world. All the hate talk in the world, for however correct it may be, will never do that. Only love and laughter can, and that’s why I’m not at all ashamed to have people like these Gilligan’s Island cast-members on this list of role models alongside most of the well-meaning, politically motivated and even admirable haters-of-the-left over on Townhall.com. In the end, what these actors did matters just as much in some cases because it’s not always about all the wars and the liberals or the conservatives being right or wrong. It’s really about love, and perhaps laughter is a big part of that, more than we even realize. It’s the reason Ann Coulter is a personal favorite, and one of the most popular conservative writers. Along with all of her jaw-dropping facts, she peppers her writing with humor. A lot of other writers here are so serious, and they’ve got good reason to be, but I tend towards the ones that make me laugh out loud. True, Coulter's humor is extremely biting, but still, perhaps if the world had a bit more mirth and laughter, if we took the time to see the humor in the events of the world, we wouldn’t be in such a diabolical mess right now.  Even when talking about the most serious of subjects, Ann Coulter still manages it.

Despite my penchant for falling right in line with the conservative right, I am not a politician. Although I admire all the pundits collected on Townhall.com, and even have my own blog here, I have noticed some differences I have to the majority of commentators and bloggers on this site. There’s a lot of hate here, and I’m not even saying it’s without good reason or that I am above it. I’m way over on the right, and personally, I know it’s hard to find anything to love about the left. What’s really sickening is how the left present themselves as so tolerant and full of love, yet being on the right, I know we’ve all experienced their hate as well. They can dish out hate with the best of them and not even blink. Like them, we too can hate, and do hate. Sure, it’s justified, but hate is hate, and I’m right in there up to my elbows, same as everybody else.

I’m similar to the people on this website in many respects, and yes, I even admire them. I see the moral decay of our culture just like they do, the same decay the liberal left wrap their arms around with love and acceptance. I don’t think most of the things the left stands for are good for this, or any, society. There are limits, and those limits are not relative to an individual or situation. Moral limits are absolute and God imposed. I believe in this unreservedly, and it is the main reason I am a conservative, and to a lesser degree, a republican. Of course, I’m a Christian first and foremost. Not that I can’t appreciate other religions and points of view though – in fact, some of my favorite writers collected here are Jewish, like Michael Medved and Jeff Jacoby, who fight for my right to be Christian and who see me and my kind as sort of spiritual brothers, for in fact, we are. Christians, after all, have, and believe in, both the Old and the New Testaments, and the Old Testament is the Jewish Bible! Both Christians and Jews have this belief in common. The Christian Messiah, Jesus Christ, was born a Jew, and His Bible was the one read by Jews then and today. The Jews even know their Bible talks about a Messiah who will one day deliver them – they just don’t all agree that it’s Jesus. But we at least have the Old Testament in common, and the conservative Jews on this website see the world and this nation in the same shades of sleaze and corruption that I do. According to scripture, the Jews are God’s chosen people, after all, and I am living proof that not all Christians are anti-Semitic. I will never have a breakdown like Gibson did because that is not a part of my past or upbringing like it was for him. I don’t blame Israel for everything and I don’t hate them the way the rest of the world does right now. Their Bible is our Bible too (at least part of it).

I’m not always proud of my hate. If you had read my journals, or some of it that I’ve shared here, you’d know I’ve said some pretty mean things, same as just about everybody else here (mean but true) and I still can’t stand the likes of Howard Stern and Rosie O’Donnell. I see the people on this website as my spiritual and philosophical brothers and sisters in the fight to keep morality from dying. My world view is the same as theirs, for the most part. Yet I am not a politician, and not in love with politics. I don’t have to agree with all that is posted here, nor am I supposed to. Bill O’Reilly often has to point out that he’s an independent instead of a conservative republican, and Glen Beck’s ad for his radio show states “Not right or left; right or wrong.” In fact, I can look upon the whole of it and find the hatred I see here, even in me, distasteful. I hate to sound like a Madonna song or a bleeding heart liberal, and I mean this in a completely different context than they do, but “love makes the world go round.” It is only love that can save us, and not the love liberals have for everything immoral (because, let’s face it, they don’t love everything, or they wouldn’t hate Ann Coulter so much). I’m talking about plain old love; the kind a man has for his wife, if they really have a loving relationship; the kind parents can have for their children, if it’s real and not tainted. I’m talking about the kind of love God has for us, and the kind we can have for Him if we are truly His followers.

As Bronco quarterback Darrent Williams was brutally gunned down in a drive by shooting in the wee first hours of the New Year, Colorado was in the national news for another reason as well: Snow, and lots of it! This is Friday, January 5, 2007 as I write this, and it snowed again today – a lot. It’s the third big snow we’ve had in as many weeks here in Colorado. The snow from the first two back to back storms over Christmas and New Years hasn’t melted yet, and this fresh cold, white powder is covering all the old stuff. The roads, especially the side roads, are a mass of old and new snow, ice, and deteriorating blacktop.

Have you ever seen The Soup on E! Entertainment Television? I can keep up on all the entertainment news and have a good laugh at the same time. Okay, so first Brad was married to Jennifer, and then he dumped her for Angelina. Then Britany dumped Kevin, Reese dumped Ryan, and Hillary dumped Chad. And now, after being dumped by Brad, Jennifer moved on and developed a relationship with Vince. She even starred in a movie with him, called The Break Up. And guess what? They broke up. Darn! I really thought they were going to last!

Two people who didn’t love each other – ever – were Rosie and Donald. It goes something like this: Donald came to the aid of some Beauty Queen for some horrible, immoral thing, and said we should give her a second chance. Then Rosie opened her incredibly big, opinionated mouth and said The Donald should never have done that. This little nymphet doesn’t deserve a second chance, Queen Rosie dictated. The Donald shot back, calling Rosie a big mouthed, butt-ugly lesbian bully, and those were some of the nicer things he said. It’s only taken off from there. Barbara Walters, as disgusted as she is by Rosie, has come out in favor of her big cash cow (the one time Rosie doesn’t mind being called a big cow!), sending a message to the entire nation that the only thing that really matters are the ratings for The View. Who cares that she’s raking Christians and conservatives over the coals. Make no bones about it, Hollywood actually likes her raking Christians and conservatives over the coals, even when she’s doing it from drunken Danny DeVito’s lap (blame George Clooney for that one as well), and there’s apparently enough liberals across the country who hang on every word of this hypocritical gossiper with the big fat chip on her big fat shoulder to make The View a huge smash daytime hit. The media treats the Rosie/Donald feud as a cute diversion, coming down hard on The Donald and patting poor Rosie on the back, so of course there’s no liberal slant in the media. This proves it.

Other happenings include a Taco Bell E.Coli outbreak – 58 cases in 6 states as of the first week of December – which was traced back to green onions. Meanwhile, scientists found evidence that Mars has water, which I’m sure they’ll use to prove that there’s life there on Mars. Perhaps we all came from there.

Things are going just great across the nation, by the way. The Democrats now dominate the House and Senate, and how long till we can finally cut and run from Iraq? Not long now with Nancy Pelosi running things.

Speaking of Iraq, it looks like Saddam Hussein is now dead, following on the heels of James Brown and Gerald Ford. (Isn’t it interesting how these presidents are so revered when they die? They aren’t treated that way when they’re alive, except by people in their own political party. Until his funeral, the most normal people knew about him was that he was accident prone and started the career of Chevy Chase.) After we got done with Saddam, letting him have his say during his long trial that lasted for months and months and months, the Iraqis hung him within hours. It appears they know how to treat bloodthirsty dictators more than this sickening, politically correct nation of peaceniks. I mean, just what do Jane Fonda and Barbara Streisand think of all this? Those Iraqis are animals! And what of all their peace loving friends over in the Islamic Taliban, all those wonderful, compassionate Muslims who stand against the warmongers in Israel just like the American left? Why, they stand against those vicious Iraqis who took their violent revenge upon that poor soul Saddam Hussein. I think – I don’t know, but I think – that Rosie probably shed a tear for him. I can picture it now. She would say, and her cronies would agree, that any death is horrible – Saddam, Hitler, Mussolini, Napoleon, Kim Jong Il, Hugo Chavez – you name it. Can’t we all just live in peace?

This is something the liberals can’t quite understand, but I’ll quote Herbert Lom from The Dead Zone, when Christopher Walken’s character asked him if he could go back in time, would he kill Hitler. Lom’s character Sam Weizak said, “I’m a man of medicine. I’m expected to save lives and ease suffering. I love people. Therefore, I would have not choice but to kill the son of a b****.” Why can’t the liberals see that to save the lives of innocents, some madmen must die?

Perhaps I’m not as intelligent as I sometimes think (sometimes I feel brilliant, and sometimes I feel as dumb as a bag of rocks). Not that I necessarily want to be that intelligent. I prefer to be wise. But I would like a better memory. Sometimes things seem to just slide right out of my head as soon as I hear them. Why does Ann Coulter get to be blessed with a photographic memory while I’m stuck with a mind that leaves me feeling like Giovanni Ribisi’s retarded character from The Other Sister most days?

You see, I “read” Mere Christianity. Well, actually I listened to the abridged book on tape that was read by Michael York while I hung Christmas lights. It was a fabulous book, and I knew I’d like it. There were moments while I was up on the roof cleaning the gutters and hanging the Christmas lights where I just sat and listened and marveled at the genius of C.S. Lewis. (Perhaps that’s the difference between us: I can’t picture Anne doing this.) Now, just a little over a month later, I find that I am quite wanting as I sit and try to recall the book and why I like it so much.

The reason I like it (and this has nothing to do with my horrid memory) is in its wisdom. This lays out, in the most intelligent of arguments, the reason for having faith in Jesus Christ and the Christian doctrine. C.S. Lewis delves into all aspects of this religion and explains what it means in relation to other belief systems, whether other religions or science. The reason this book is so great is that, if ever anyone needed a reason for why I and others believe in Christ as we do, this book is basically the first and last word on that subject. I could not spell it out as well as C.S. Lewis does here, and he made me see my faith in a new light, supported by his very intelligent arguments. Not only does it spell it all out quite clearly but it makes the case for Christians whose faith is not what it should be. Lewis attempts to tell readers what Christianity is and means, not just for those who don’t believe, but for those who do, and yet don’t quite understand the entire nature of the thing. In this respect, it can help to get those who’ve fallen away from God’s path back on the right road.

Not that it isn’t slow going! Since Lewis is literally a genius, it may take some time for some of his arguments to sink in. I myself have to listen and really think about it for it to have any meaning. Oh, Lewis helps by summing up most of his arguments in the book before moving on to new studies in Christian thought, and I’m grateful for these recaps, but it’s still a lot to mentally chew on, comprehend, and fully understand all at once. This is why I believe there is no “secret to life” or “secret to the meaning of the universe.” I actually believe the meaning of existence is right before our eyes, in one instance simple and yet so complex that we can’t mentally hold all the pieces together at once to really understand it all. The best we can hope for is to understand only bits and pieces at a time. The same thing applies here. Lewis juggles with all the right concepts, and each part of this sheds light on the meaning of it all, yet it’s difficult to take it all in and comprehend it all at once.

Of course, some people are better at that then others – the kind who are experts at chess and can see the game 10 or more moves ahead in all the possible combinations. I can’t, and so must muddle through this book and life one concept at a time, struggling to connect different facts and truths I might have heard or read before. The thing I really like about this book is simply this: C.S. Lewis is a brilliant Christian who came to Christ when he tried to prove that God doesn’t exist.

The liberal left often portrays Christians as indoctrinated fools, and in many instances, they’re right. A lot of Christians are indoctrinated fools. I may even be one of them. But C.S. Lewis is not. In C.S. Lewis, and this book, we have a genius who lays out a brilliant argument for why one should believe in Christianity. An educated elitist over on the left may be able to get the last word on this soft spoken writer (I never claimed to be a great debater), yet C.S. Lewis and his book are not so easy to slam, and that’s because he is so highly intelligent.

Say what you will about indoctrinated idiots using Christianity as a crutch, but if you actually read the bible, you would find that Jesus Christ, as presented here, and no matter what else you think he may be, was brilliant and intelligent and wise, beyond all other men, and even non-Christians would have to agree that if he was merely a man, he belongs on the short list of the greatest thinkers of all time. I mean, even Muslims and atheistic scientists can see the intelligence and wisdom of Jesus’ thought and philosophy as presented in the Bible. Others in the Bible as it is written, such as St. Paul, also have wisdom in their arguments and apologetic discourses. Yet if there is any problem associated with this, it is that unbelievers don’t trust the Bible is accurate and was written by true prophets. They see it as ancient writings passed down and altered over the centuries, particularly since even Christian scholars agree that most Bible books were written decades or even centuries after the events they supposedly document. How accurate can they be? Yet believing in the legitimacy of the Bible has really not been anything more than an act of faith. Even accurate, historical, archeological proofs aren’t enough to bridge the gap between fact and faith. Let me put it this way: John F. Kennedy existed, and if they uncover new archeological evidence on him 2,000 years from now, that doesn’t necessarily validate everything that everybody has ever written about him. Belief in the truth accuracy of the Bible, however well proven and documented through archeological evidence it may or may not be, is still just a faith. There was no doubt that Jesus, as portrayed in the Bible, was a brilliant teacher and philosopher, but doubters would question whether the Jesus as portrayed in the modern Christian Bible (or any of the older ones either) is all that accurate. They would question whether some of the writings about Him were imbued or altered to give an inaccurate overall picture of who He was and what He said. Trust me, I know. I’ve had these kinds of arguments.

So when we come to someone like C.S. Lewis, it is infinitely more factual. You don’t have to believe to know that Lewis wrote every word himself, and even if he had help, bouncing ideas off of his friends in the “Inklings” or instance, his arguments were still accurate and have not been embellished over time. For non-believers, that should lend a whole new credence to the doctrines of the Christian faith, and therefore bring the Bible more into focus and even help to validate the claim that Jesus was more than just a man or that the Bible is the word of God, regardless of the human middlemen God used.

So you have problems with the Christian faith? Then read this book and then refute its claims and invalidate my religion. You better know what you’re doing, though, and it better be more than just, “I don’t agree, and Lewis is a simpleton” as some critics who are obviously less intelligent than Lewis try to do. In fact, you better be able to prove it. Go on. I dare you. I double dare you. I double dog dare you!

Bleach! We saw a few conventional comedies this month – you know, the type that are fed through the Hollywood Insta-Script & Movie Machine, and of all of them (including The Lake House, The Break-Up, and Click), Deck the Halls was the most cloyingly unoriginal and irritating. Of course, since it’s about Christmas, no matter how bombastic, loud, and unfunny it is (remember Christmas with the Kranks?), my brother will probably like it and buy it. After hearing about Danny DeVito’s drunken tirade against President Bush on The View, however, I wouldn’t buy it for that reason alone. And what happened with Matthew Broderick? I loved him in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Biloxi Blues, and Glory, and he was okay in films like WarGames, Ladyhawke, and most recently the TV version of The Music Man. He’s had a stinker or two along the way, such as Addicted to Love, but lately they seem to be piling up. He has a certain amount of charm, but it’s completely lost in films like Inspector Gadget, The Stepford Wives, The Producers, and now this piece of garbage. Even Kate Beckinsale as his wife can’t salvage this load of Christmas crap! Give me Christmas with the Kranks any day over this obnoxious movie (and Christmas with the Kranks was no holiday classic, let me tell you!)

The whole thing is garish and hyper, and then they try to wring meaning out of it all at the end when DeVito’s floozy, liberal wife, the one hanging out all over but still wearing that prominent Christian cross, brings everyone together with a group rendition of “Oh, Holy Night” while everybody holds their cell phones open for a sea of light. The audience seemed warmed by this, but some of us, particularly my sister and me, were appalled. Christmas may be a lot of things, but it is not garish, loud light shows and holiday squabbling punctuated by a second-thought song to Jesus led by a semi-Christian nymphet at best. This scene where MTV arrives while the whole town gets together to light DeVito’s house so NASA can see it from space is particularly nauseating (this is after he defaced the town without apology and put himself before anyone else, including his family, neighbors, and job).

I realize people like this exist in the real world. (That’s why the audience was ooing and awing at just the right parts – like these characters, they just don’t get it). And I understand that as Christians, we’re supposed to be as loving and forgiving as this town apparently is to DeVito in the end. Am I being too judgmental? Wouldn’t Jesus do what this town does and forgive DeVito? Well here are a couple of short answers: First of all, this town isn’t being forgiving. They are not genuine. Their generosity is a Hollywood creation, and it’s superficial. Secondly, Jesus does indeed forgive, but then requires of us to repent of our ways, and to follow Him and His ways and teachings. This shallow character DeVito plays, and all the other characters, still don’t understand this at the end of the day. This movie is just a mess. If you’re secular, you may still like this movie, even though it’s shrill and insufferable. As a Christian though, there is nothing here to wrap a good emotion or inspiration around that isn’t filled to the rim with a faked sincerity or tastelessness.

That was the story that caught my attention amid all these news reports of the big Democratic wins across the nation, Nancy Pelosi as the new Speaker of the House, the civil war in Iraq, Donald Rumsfeld resigning, and six Imams whining after acting suspiciously and then rightfully being thrown off a flight.

The question I have is: Why are people still treating O.J. Simpson like a celebrity, complete with reverence and idol worship? He doesn’t deserve it. He’s a murderer! Would an innocent man try to cash in on the murder of his former wife and a friend by writing a book called If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened? And just who is that rooting around in the gutter next to O.J.? Why, it’s the Fox Network, which has a lot of explaining to do, whether or not Rupert Murdock stepped in at the last minute to pull the wretched interview with a disgusting murderer. Those poor Brown and Goldman families! I can’t even imagine!

And who knew Kramer was a racist, ranting against heckler’s during his stand-up routine and using the N-word, and caught on video? Of course, Michael Richards took the standard route of apologizing, this time on Letterman, invited by Jerry Seinfeld. I think it would be a mistake, however, for him to go to the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, as if they’re the bastion of all causes black. They’ve turned Martin Luther King Jr.’s fight into a complete mess. Since I’m not black I won’t elaborate lest Sharpton and Jackson or their supporters jump down my throat, but perhaps that’s just my point. King wouldn’t have. I think if King were alive today, he’d sound an awful lot like Larry Elders, and would probably keep his distance from the likes of Sharpton, Jackson, and Spike Lee.

And what do I think of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House? Mark Knoffler comes to mind, because we’re in Dire Straights! Bin Laden must be happy. I know Rosie is. And liberal acquaintances wonder why I’m so far on the conservative right! Well, for me it’s a question of culture. On our side: Winston Churchill, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Benjamin Netanyahu, and everybody on Townhall.com, some of who could easily be called “brilliant” or “genius.” On their side: Howard Stern, Courtney Love, Madonna, Randi Rhoades, George Michael, Michael Jackson, Elton John – you know, all the paragons of virtue and morality. Guess which side Nancy Pelosi’s on, and then guess why I think we’re in dire straights!

At the beginning of every month I write in my journal about what is going on with me and my family, my job, and my walk with God before talking a bit about what’s going on in the news and the pop culture. The stuff I write about me and family or even my job I usually find too personal to include on my Townhall.com blog. I usually only want to share stuff dealing with the state of the world and pop culture, my Christian religion, or things of a conservative nature. Since I haven’t yet written about the cultural stuff that caught my eye in November, that leaves my walk with God to share, which I usually don’t mind sharing – this time, however, it’s a little too personal to share, which is too bad because our small bible group got to hear from a member of our group who’s on a two week leave from the military where he’s stationed in Afghanistan, and his words were fascinating! I also write a yearly Christmas poem, yet I’m not sure about sharing something like that on a blog either. Should I have it copyrighted before posting it?

Therefore, I’m scanning my journal, going back in time to find something I haven’t copied in here yet, and I find myself going all the way back to March of this year, when I talked about the book of Leviticus after reading it:

Leviticus is a book of worship. Because the people of Israel were separated from God by sin (as are we all), they needed to address the sin, and so much of Leviticus is devoted to sacrifices, both those to give thanks and those to make atonement. There were descriptions of animal sacrifices for every occasion, celebration, and sin atonement. This book is hard to get through simply because it is all so repetitive. It’s also quite bloody, since blood was the life, and the life was what was offered to God for thanks or penance. Slaughtering bulls, burning the fat, sprinkling the blood, both on the alter and on the priests – well, unless you’re a big fan of gory horror films, you might just find all of this disgusting, and fans of gory horror films probably aren’t the biggest Christians. To put it bluntly, gore connoisseurs are not the kind to spend weekend nights studying the word of God. That means it’s the rest of us Christians who must suffer through the horrific descriptions of animal slaughters and sacrifices, one bloody one after another, over and over and over again! Later, the book talks in detail about the priests, their duties and their wardrobes, and the festivals and holidays (Holy Days) the people were to hold for God throughout the year (or years), and since the people were to worship God not just by these sacrifices but by their daily lives, God “laid down the law,” and they were given bunches of them to follow. This book has very few stories and lots of detailed descriptions. Still, I like how my Life Application Study Bible describes it as “a whole book of the Bible…dedicated to worship.” That’s really what it is at its core, yet one doesn’t quite realize this when reading yet another description of the butchering of some poor, defenseless animal, describing it in revolting detail.

I name a role model in my journal every month, someone I can look up to and admire, or who I feel others should - someone who I think is perhaps better than the usual shallow celebrities and can teach us more than how selfish and immoral they can be. After reading his biography on his personal website (to promote his debut CD Red), I knew that John Stevens was unconventional. While his peers were listening to Limp Bizkit and Lincoln Park, he was driving his older brother and sister crazy singing old Sinatra songs. Spending lots of time sifting through his grandparents’ old record collection, he fell in love with the old swing tunes by the likes of Dean Martin, Cole Porter, Duke Ellington, Tony Bennett, and particularly the Chairman of the Board, Frank Sinatra. If one were to read over my journals, one would probably see that I also have a certain appreciation for this style of music as well (though definitely not so exclusively), naming the likes of Harry Connick Jr., Michael Bublé, Dean Martin, and even Frank himself as favorites of mine on different occasions. I must like something about that type of music, and that goes for the crooner from the fifth season of American Idol, David Radford, who managed to make it to at least the top twenty before getting the boot.

One of the things I like the most about John Stevens (or anybody really) is his quiet demeanor and humble personality. On a show full of pop-star wannabes and loud and selfish divas in the making, he’s one of the calmer, more congenial and respectful guys, following in the footsteps of RJ Helton and Clay Aiken, and then being followed as well by the likes of Anthony Federov from season 4 and Kevin Covais from season 5. Seeing some of these self-effacing and gentle people on the show every year, it does my heart good to know that there are quite a lot of gentler men that make up the world, and that not everybody with talent is a loudmouthed jerk on a quest for fame and power. In fact, where American Idol is concerned, there are lots of people I’ve come to like for their personalities, both men and women. And even among all these more friendly personalities, John Stevens seems to stand out, if for no other reason than that he is quite tall and thin with a pale complexion and a shock of red hair on top. It left him often looking out of place among all the others contestants, but that might just be one thing that worked to his credit.

At this point in his life and career, especially since he’s still so young, he could actually go either way. He seems to have that solid basis of family and love, but then again, his musical genre of choice isn’t the cleanest; just look at all the kinds of things Sinatra was into, with the drinking and the smoking and the dames in the gambling capital of the world - there’s a lot here that rivals Hollywood and rock ‘n’ roll for the things that can corrupt a soul. Sure, there’s a lot to like about the classic style of jazz crooners, but they are far from angels, and yet, along with the music itself, John idolizes the whole package. “I want to show America that jazz, big band, and swing music aren’t dead,” he was quoted as saying on his personal website, as if Harry Connick Jr. and Michael Bublé hadn’t already been bringing that style to the masses for years, or Bette Midler recently singing the songs of Rosemary Clooney and Peggy Lee on tribute albums. “Those types of music are timeless and fun and there’s a whole cool lifestyle associated with it,” he continued. Cool is right, but it’s perhaps not so moral. That lifestyle, however cool it may be, is not without its numerous addictions.

At this point, John still has a noble character as far as I can tell. Realizing early on that his fascination for music went beyond being just a hobby, he “took up the piano at 8,” according to his biography on his website, and “has worked with a vocal coach for the last two years, and joined the Western New York Children’s Choir, Buffalo Choral Arts Society, and American Music Abroad, which gave him the opportunity to perform in such faraway places as Venice, Germany, and Switzerland.” At sixteen, he knows what he wants and has rigorously pursued that goal, and that is also worthy of admiration, but only when he manages to keep his humility intact.

Yet showbiz can go a long way toward removing any kind of noble character. John still has that, but for how long? “When I went back to school,” he said on the website, “people recognized me on the street and girls treated me differently. Not the ones I knew but the popular too-cool-for-anybody ones. Suddenly I was on that level too. It’s fake, but that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy it. I am a teenager so I definitely don’t mind all the panties, bras, and teddy bears people throw on stage. Of course, my mom having to tour with me ruins any real chance of anything going further.” Good! You can see from what he’s written that he still has a lot of growing to do, and a lot of life lessons to learn. He may be shy and unpretentious, but he’s still only human, and still a guy, and he’s young. He has panties and bras thrown at him, and he idolizes the cool and stylish crooners with their smart suits and their lifestyle of high rollers and “dames” with “gams” and all those gin and tonics in smoke filled lounges! I love Michael Bublé and he has a great voice, style, and sense of humor, but he’s a guy through and through, and don’t think it hasn’t skipped my attention that he tends to follow in the footsteps of his idols in more than just his music of choice and silky vocals. It’s a lifestyle of glitz and money and “goy-jus” women and more than enough chances for making the immoral choices. John Stevens, more than most, may be able to avoid some of the pitfalls others may fall into so readily given this same lifestyle. Then again, look what fame did to mama’s boy Elvis Presley…

Because of his current humbleness and unassuming, pleasant personality, along with his talent and commitment to his goals, he makes it onto this list of role models. How long he stays on that list before I regret including him is really up to him… as it is with anybody I might name. But for now, in my own humble opinion, he’s still one to keep an eye on.

Writer’s block: Of course I’ve experienced it before. Sometimes you sit in front of a computer screen (or a piece of paper) and the white blankness of it overwhelms you. It’s not even a question of how to write something, but rather what to write.

There’s reason for it: I want it to be eloquent, whatever it is. And I’ve been writing in a journal for well over ten years now, and writing something about my walk with God every month for about the last seven of those years at least. That’s not even including the times I talk about God in my other journal sections, like December of last year when I talked about The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I’d be willing to bet it would even out to at least one other time each of those months where I talked about my walk with God at some other place in my journal. Seven years times twelve months in a year is eighty-four, and eighty four twice is 168! That’s a lot of writing about God. In all of it, as I sit here trying to write something new or original, I have to think, “Have I written this before?” The good Lord knows I’ve covered some similar topics from time to time. How often have I written about the flawed theory of evolution, and said the exact same thing? How many different ways can I talk about our freedom to choose our own paths before I start to sound like a broken record? How do I keep my writing alive and fresh after writing well over 168 essays on God, especially if I’ve got writer’s block?

Here’s what’s going through my mind: We’re done studying James in church, and now we’re in a series called “Exploring the Da Vinci Code” while they teach about the fallacies of that Dan Brown book. The movie is released next month though [I originally wrote this in my journal in May], so I thought if I talk about it at all, it should be next month. Then I heard the old song “Those Shoes” by the Eagles with that killer base line this morning. I had never really paid attention to the lyrics. This time, however, I listened, and as they sang about “those shoes” as a character trait, almost an integral part of the woman they sang about as if the shoes helped to describe exactly who she was, I thought about the same thing for the choice I’ve made to follow Jesus and to walk in his footsteps (or desire to). I thought of the premise of a poem, perhaps something with a title like “The Sandals,” and it would explain the choices we all make and where those choices take us, and I’d substitute different kinds of shoes for the different choices we could make. It didn’t turn out.

Then I watched some of my Wow DVDs. I loved the song “When Love Takes You In” by Steven Curtis Chapman and the pumping “Savior Song” by Rachel Lampa, and then “Irene” by TobyMac choked me up a little due to the message of maintaining hope in Jesus and His love for us in this day and age and in this sinning world that surrounds us. Wonderful messages all. Rebecca St. James’ “Song of Love” also captures something very special, and made me think of God in nature, and that combined with the message of “Irene” made me think of a waterfall of living water washing us clean and making us new in His sight and His love, and I toyed with writing a poem called “Waterfall.”

And of course I thought of God when my older brother called us about his son. I collect Touched by an Angel on DVD and was watching an episode when he called, and just as with the lyrics to “Irene” by TobyMac (if you really pay attention to them), Monica’s inspirational speech to a cop who survived being shot and became addicted to drugs in that episode (Joe Penny in “Trust”) rings true for my brother’s troubled son as well: “This bullet ripped through your body and your body survived, but your spirit is still bleeding, and that’s because you weren’t wearing your armor. There’s only one thing in this world that’s truly bulletproof, and that’s faith: Not faith in a gun that shoots or a radio that works or faith in your own cop’s instinct, but the faith that you wrap yourself in every day of your life, the faith that no matter what happens, you won’t lose God’s love, and all the bullets in the world can’t pierce it, and all the pills in the world can’t replace it…” If only this message could truly reach my nephew’s ears and soul!

Don’t let this long passage fool you. Though it is filled with an obvious love and devotion for God, it is also quite disjointed, going all over the place, just as my thoughts are now. If nothing else, it at least shows what’s going on in my head right now, as embarrassing as that may be. It’s not a side of myself I usually like to show the world, but it is the beginning of thought and, hopefully – eventually - wisdom.

From my journal in April of 2006, I commented on two of the news stories in the headlines. The first was about the high price of gas. The second, which I’m just now downloading into my Townhall.com blog this week, was the walk out by millions of (mostly illegal alien) minorities to participate in marches on government buildings across the nation, including, of course, Denver. I’m of two minds. First off, these minorities may have a leg to stand on. This nation isn’t just European in its history. This nation also has a rich history of native American tribes and other nationalities like Asian immigrants and African slaves coming here of their own accord or being brought here against their will and all becoming woven into the fabric of what made America. Likewise, Mexicans came here too when this nation was young – that’s why New Mexico is thusly named. In fact, I believe I’m correct in assuming such state names as Arizona, Colorado, and California are linguistically Mexican (Spanish) in origin. Colorado is derived from the Spanish for “Colored River” (Coloró del Rio). (The word “America” sounds like it could be Spanish, but it’s actually derived from an Italian explorer named Amerigo Vespucci who made two trips here in the late 1400’s and claimed to have discovered it. He was the first to give it the name Novus Mundus, or “New World”).

Yet whether or not these immigrants, illegal or otherwise, actually have a leg to stand on is a moot point. This country affords them freedom to live however they want, as it should in any free country, but to function as a unified whole, they should melt into the culture somewhat. They can remain separate from it, with their own culture and language, but it will only help to divide the nation. Although a late uncle of mine might attribute this division to a Machiavellian plot by the Government to keep the nation alienated and at odds, I’m not going to subscribe to that X-Files type of conspiracy theory; not that it isn’t possible, but I’m not politically informed or savvy enough to make that kind of call. What I will say is that, in the Bible story of the tower of Babel, God confused the people’s language to separate them. People speaking different languages and living in separate communities, each with their own cultural standards, tends to do that. It creates a communication breakdown. And I understand about the need for cultural pride and heritage, and the need not to be absorbed into another’s culture, but regardless, it does lead to a disconnection of individuals and communities, and then the nation will not be unified.

Yet another problem with this issue can be addressed as we look at exactly what the government means when dealing with immigrants and what the elementary education system in public schools means when it bandies about terms like “multi-cultural” and pushes the learning of a second language. They don’t really mean embracing French, Icelandic, Chinese, or Middle Eastern cultures and languages. What they really mean is Spanish, and the Mexican culture in particular. In my book, it leaves them looking rather hypocritical and rather exclusionary, rolling out the red carpet for their Spanish speaking citizens, but leaving Russian, Turkish, and Japanese children, to name just a few, by the wayside. Multicultural and bilingual programs overwhelmingly apply to Spanish only, so I wish they would just call it what it is rather than trying to hide behind fancy but inaccurate terms.

This nation will remain divided until all these people with all their various, wonderful freedoms start making informed, intelligent decisions and choices, until the word responsibility becomes as cherished a word as freedom.

Bringing my unique sci-fi geek perspective to the table, in numerous episodes of Star Trek, the starship crews come up against god-like aliens and transformed humans, characters that sanctimoniously pass judgment on humanity and use the crew for experiments or amusement, and the moral is always the same: To be truly evolved, you must be humble – you must have morals and compassion. In The Next Generation, the omnipotent Q tells Captain Picard that they can’t just have omnipotent beings running around the universe, implying that any entity with that much power must have wisdom. In the second pilot to the original series, Kirk speaks of his mutated former friend who now possesses god-like powers and uses them malevolently, explaining that a god must have wisdom and compassion above all else. Well I’m telling you: the exact same thing applies to a free people. Without wisdom and compassion, we cannot wield our limited freedoms responsibly… and if not, like these god-creatures in science fiction, we shouldn’t have them at all.

Amid all the usual stories of death, murder, violence, war, political grandstanding, and Denise Richards buying coffee at a local Hollywood Starbucks (from my journal in April of 2006), there were two stories I felt like commenting on. The first is the price of gas, which is now at around $3.00 a gallon with talk that it could go as high as five. As I see it, there are two main reasons the gas prices are so high, and they both have to do with greed. All I know is that it has little to do with me, though I seem to be reaping the consequences along with everyone else. The first reason is the proliferation of gas guzzling SUVs. People crying foul about high gas prices would possibly carry more weight if they weren’t intent on driving vehicles big enough for an indoor tennis court and Jacuzzi. People these days need those huge suburbans because they’ve got large families and large groceries and large vacations to remote places you can’t get to in a Civic. The second reason for these high gas prices is even worse: The big gas companies. Whether or not George W. Bush is in their pocket (as some political pundits are ripe to suggest) is beside the point. Sure, I wish the government could do something about it, but it’s the same old thing about corporate greed at the highest levels (and that includes in the government). A $400 million retirement package for the chief operating officers of companies like Exxon and Chevron is probably closer to the truth than we’d like to admit (or know about). “Rape” is a strong word, but I think it applies here. Those who are so greedy that they will “rape” others for wealth forgot, or never had any kind of, Christian principles, and unless they change (which is unlikely), you most likely won’t find them in heaven. That’s why Jesus said it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. I shouldn’t take comfort in that, but should weep for them. So I will. Yes, that’s right. I actually pity these wealthy men and women who embrace wealth, money and power by standing on the backs of other people they don’t give a crap about. It happened at Enron, and the company I used to work for, Global Crossing, and is possibly happening with my current company.

The second story I wanted to comment on I’ll share next time.

What constitutes a hero? Is a hero different than a role model, and where does idol worship enter the picture? Does a hero have to have superpowers like the characters in the new hit show Heroes, or can they be ordinary people like you and me? Well, when was the last time you ran across an indestructible cheerleader or a Japanese office drone who could bend time and space? In the real world, heroes are found in the ordinary and everyday.

“I think we would all like this victory to go out to all the other guys, and I’m talking about the people in this city who are super good at their jobs but never get any credit, like the lady in the D.M.V. – that’s a rough job… and the guy that drives the snow plow, and the school nurse…”
                     - William H. Macy
                       Mystery Men (1999)

From the soldiers of our military risking and giving their lives for our freedoms to the cops and firemen who go above and beyond the call of duty, to teachers (the really good ones) reaching minds and helping to actually make students think, there are heroes all around us. The problem is that, as I’ve said before, people will believe whatever they want to believe and will place people on a pedestal for any reason. Whoopi Goldberg and Janeane Garofalo are heroes to the people on the left, and so are Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi. It begs the question: What really makes a hero?

Here’s another question: Can a hero mess up and still be a hero? Can we still applaud Mel Gibson for giving us the film The Passion of the Christ, even though he got drunk and slurred the Jews? Well, nobody’s perfect.

I just watched an old episode of Touched By an Angel, “Groundrush” (original airdate October 27, 1996). The angel Monica is infatuated with the episode’s guest star Robert Hayes as a pilot who can do no wrong. He helps out with charities and gives of his time, and perhaps even helps little old ladies across the street. Monica can’t even see why this guy needs an angel. If ever there was a human hero, this guy is it! So when the police show up and take him in, sure that they’ve found a murderer from twenty years ago, Monica trusts in him so much she interferes with the police investigation, to give this guy time to clear his good name. She thereby puts her entire existence as an angel of God on the line. As another angel says later on while reprimanding Monica, “You know the problem with making humans into heroes? That when they eventually act like humans, we’re so disappointed – and that’s not really fair to them, is it?” I know this is just fiction, but he’s right. One thing I always liked about this show is how they demonstrate that only God is perfect, and even angels can make big mistakes, like Monica did in this episode.

The characters in Heroes may eventually turn out to be the real deal, with or without their superpowers. Meanwhile, out here in the real world, heroes are real, and a role model can be anyone who lives and acts the way we all should. The main question is by whose standards they should be measured.

One definition of what constitutes a hero would be those who use their powers responsibly. I remember writing an essay back in my college days comparing characters from Shakespeare’s The Tempest, Macbeth, and Measure for Measure, and my conclusion was how heroes were defined in each of those plays by how they used power. Those who used it for selfish gain, including murder, like Macbeth, were the opposite of what defines heroes; Macbeth was an anti-hero at best and a villain at worst. Angelo in Measure for Measure wasn’t as bad as Macbeth, but power still corrupted him. Only Prospero from The Tempest, who used his power responsibly, was the true hero of the three characters, displaying for all practical purposes the true meaning of the creed “With great power comes great responsibility” centuries before it would become the catchphrase of a superhero blockbuster movie.

And perhaps that’s all I’m looking for in a role model: Someone who uses his or her powers responsibly. “Responsibility” is a word that takes a backseat to words like “freedom” and “tolerance” in today’s liberal culture (except for the freedom to practice religion or to have absolute morals rather than relative ones).

We have to look beyond peoples abilities and talents to find the heroes. There are thousands of actors and musicians and writers who are talented, but I’m not looking for talent. Lots of talented people make extremely poor role models (hate to admit it but, yes, I liked The Color Purple and Whoopi was actually good in it). What do they do outside of their chosen profession that makes them heroes?

Most celebrities have charities and pet causes. For the last two weeks, Jeopardy has been hauling out celebrities playing for their favorite charities, some more worthy causes than others. The celebrity charity fundraising that caught my eye, however, wasn’t revealed on Jeopardy. I took notice of it probably because I like the new show Heroes (I am a sci-fi geek after all). In the latest issue of TV Guide was this small snippet in their “Cheers and Jeers” section: “Cheers to the cast of Heroes for participating in an online auction to benefit costar Greg Grunberg’s charity, the Pediatric Epilepsy Project. (Grunberg, whose son Jake has epilepsy, also appeared on the TV Guide Channel to promote the fund raiser.) Fans can bid on autographed drawings by each actor at HeroesAuction.com until November 28. We’re glad to see these Heroes are using their superpowers for a good cause.” I agree.

Like many actors, Greg Grunberg has been around for years, acting in everything from weekly TV shows like Diagnosis Murder, Silk Stalkings, NYPD Blue, Lost, The Dead Zone, and was part of the regular cast for Felicity and Alias. He’s also been in movies like The Hollow Man and Mission Impossible 3. He’s not really a star. Like a lot of other actors, he has some talent, and is committed to the craft of acting. Most actors will never become stars, and that’s okay. In fact, knowing what usually happens to stars, perhaps it’s preferable to just remain a professional actor.

And so what if Greg Grunberg supports his charity out of a personal reason or need. Don’t most people get involved in charities, particularly medical ones, due to personal reasons? Grunberg’s character on Heroes, the mind reading police officer Matt Parkman, may or may not be a reel hero by using his powers for good. But the actor who plays him can be a real hero by doing the same thing, and it doesn’t matter that he’s supporting the Pediatric Epilepsy Project because his son suffers from it. All that really matters is that he is using his celebrity power to do good in the real world and the same goes for all his cast mates. Here’s a note he wrote on the HeroesAuction.com website:

“I just want to take this opportunity to thank all of you out there who have taken an interest in these one of a kind Heroes drawings, illustrated and autographed by each cast member, and a limited edition Heroes comic book, autographed by acclaimed artist Tim Sale. It is such an amazing experience to be a part of this show as an actor. And to now be able to raise funds for my charity, makes it all the better. All of the proceeds from the sale of these sketches will benefit my charity – the Pediatric Epilepsy Project (PEP) – supporting UCLA’s Pediatric Neurology Department.
“Three years ago, my oldest son, Jake, was diagnosed with epilepsy and has been doing great thanks to all the hard work and care of the doctors, nurses, scientists, and researchers at UCLA. They are truly life savers, and Jake, and children like him, are able to live relatively normal lives due to their incredible work.
"So bid, bid, and keep on bidding… knowing you are not only getting a Heroes collector’s item connected to one of the coolest shows on TV, but also doing a wonderful thing in supporting PEP and all the great work they do to help treat and care for children with epilepsy.
"And remember, 'I know what you’re thinking…'"
                                         - Greg Grunberg

I don’t know – call me crazy – but that just sounds like someone who's trying to make a difference, trying to make the world a better place to live. Perhaps he deserves a little respect and a few accolades for that. Not only is he helping this charity, but he in turn applauds all the doctors, nurses, and scientists who work diligently at UCLA to cure epilepsy in children, and at the same time graciously thanks internet surfers for bidding to support his cause, and also compliments the rest of the Heroes cast. He sounds like a role model to me – in fact, they all do – simply because this world is a better place with them in it. It’s like Pay It Forward. What a world this would be if we all did stuff like this. But no! The world is full of the types of shallow selfish kids you can find on MTV most times of the day or night. Pick just about any show and you’ll see nothing but rampant self-indulgence and egocentric, jaded, and cynical teens who criticize everything and everyone – except themselves.