Home again, home again, jiggitty jig!

The past few weeks, and yet for another few weeks, I've been spending quite a bit of time traveling for work. I just got home from San Francisco after being away for most of the week. This has been making it difficult to get anything worth posting put together on this blog. I actually have some ideas I'd like to share, some of them I've written down but haven't had the wherewithall to get it posted. I actually [found some power for my laptop] while at the airport yesterday and typed up some thoughts but there was no way to get connected to the internet from the airport since I didn't have a wireless card on the laptop. Now I'm home but have been too busy to set up the laptop and get it connected to my home network.

Anyway. It is good to be home. I've a little over a week before I head off again. I've got two more trips to S.F. before we're done up there for a while. It will be nice to have this project completed.

Southern California is burning. I've two fires blocking two of the routes I would take to go west from my house, which leaves me with one. I hope people are alright and their homes are protected. I worry about firemen getting hurt. I'm glad someone is trying to protect us, though. We're not so close to the fires that we're in danger - I'm glad. Looking out my front window, though, I can see the hills that are burning. It is pretty close, close enough we're taking the dogs with us while we go run some errands. I hope the Santa Ana winds will die down soon.

The one fire is burning close enough that I could see it from my front door. Lucky for us, the wind is blowing away from our home not towards us. It has the whole family concerned, though. As you can see, the fire is just over the hill. We can see the aircraft dropping the water and fire retardant on the fires, though I was unable to get this in the picture.

It isn't too far away.

Churches and Politics

Section 501(c)(3) of US Code Title 26, which governs tax-exempt organizations, reads:

(3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection(h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.

According to many, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has stepped beyond the bounds established for a tax-exempt organization. These people are calling for revoking the church's tax-exempt standing with the IRS because through inciting its members to donate time and means to support Proposition 8, the church has now made a substantial part of its activities attempting to influence legislation. According to antagonists, the church was able to secure millions of dollars in cash and in-kind campaign contributions to a group that supported Proposition 8.

The church claims it was well within its rights to act as it did in support of this and other like measures across the country. Evidently, there is confusion as to exactly how involved the church was in this campaign. The Family, a Proclamation to the World, is explicit in defining the relationship of the man and woman in marriage as being paramount. Recent discussions about this have not been any more forceful than at any other time. It was this document that provided me with the guidance I needed when making my personal decisions about the role of the government in regards to the nature of marriage. After describing marriage specifically as that relationship between a man and a woman, we are called to promote these measures.

We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.

I was inclined to believe 

otherwise. I was inclined to support an environment in which people could make the decisions to live their life, accepting the consequences of those decisions. Of course, many would suggest there are certain aspects of life that aren't decisions at all. Having to live with the consequences of non-decisions is patently unfair.

Consequences of non-decisions. I live with consequences of actions, decisions I make and decisions others make for me. Consequences are always a part of life whether we like them or not. We cannot always control consequences. Controlling consequences is a bit like controlling the weather. However limited our control, anything we do to subvert or change them will generally result simply in a postponement of the ultimate outcome. 

So, churches get involved in politics all the time. It is only a very rare circumstance when the LDS church also gets involved. When it does, it is not embraced well even by the membership of the church. We discussed this in our home as well. You see, we're all pretty well versed in what the standard position of the church is as it comes to politics. This is a position that was established early. In fact, it is recorded in Section 134 of the Doctrine and Covenants:

We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied.

The standard statement from the church during every political season seems to follow a common course:

The Church does not:

• Endorse, promote or oppose the political parties, candidates or platforms.

• Allow its church buildings, membership lists or other resources to be used for partisan political purposes.

• Attempt to direct its members as to which candidate or party they should give their votes to. This policy applies whether or not a candidate for office is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

• Attempt to direct or dictate to a government leader.

The Church does:

• Reserve the right as an institution to address, in a nonpartisan way, issues that it believes have significant community or moral consequences or that directly affect the interests of the Church.

So, the churches statement of political neutrality coincides with scripture. But does the actions taken in the months leading up to this political season conform to this policy? Some have argued it has not; however, if we return to section 134 we recognize even in 1834 Joseph Smith understood there may be a reason for the church to take some action:

We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upo0n the rights and liberties of others; but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor to dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guild, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.

We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.

Arguments for both support of Proposition 8 and support of standing down from such involvement could be made from just reading this passage.

The church will generally refrain from any sort of political support or denouncement. In the case of Proposition 8, the main trajectory or focus has been to restate those doctrines as described in The Family, a Proclamation to the World. Some calls for members to align themselves with other organizations who were supporting the passage of Proposition 8 have provided grounds for antagonists to suggest the church has been more directly involved in politics than it should.

I was not one of those who jumped into this with both feet. In fact, our family did not provide money or time to the campaign. There was not any point at which I felt compelled to do more. Mobilization of the members in this campaign stemmed primarily from the consciences of the individual members and not from church leadership.

At what point is it appropriate for the church to make strides into the Political arena? If the fundamental doctrines of Family are not strong enough motivators, is there ever a time when the Church should be involved?

What's in a dream?

A response to Th's inquiry here.

Most mornings I wake with little or no memory of any dreams I might have had during the night. In fact, when memories of a dream persist beyond regaining consciousness, I rarely hold onto them longer than it takes to pour myself a bowl of Capt'n Crunch. By my own experience, I would probably seem to be more skeptical of most people gaining anything of significant value from their dreams.

Contrary to what it might seem, I do believe we could all gain a lot if we could harness and fully comprehend those things we observe in our dreams. The dreams I can recall are seldom presented in cinematic detail. Instead, I am presented with disjointed pictures (some motion, some static) and sound. While some of the dreams I recall were silent black and white pictures, others have been 360° panoramic monstrosities complete with surround sound.

Deciphering meaning from these dreams is seldom easy. I remember waking from a dream while I was living in Japan. This dream was one of the more vivid. The dream depicted a moment in time just before a tsunami was to make landfall. It was not a normal tsunami. The spectacle of the event was drawing crowds of monumental size. I found myself running from person to person trying to warn them to leave the beach, decrying the foolishness of giving into their human yet morbid nature of curiosity.

I succeeded in convincing just a few would be spectators to seek higher ground. Leaving the terrible yet awe striking sight for safety, I turned my back on those that would not heed my call.

I woke from the dream in confusion. This dream was too vivid. In fact, 25 years later, I still remember the dream as if I had just had it. I could not parse its meaning or even if it had one. However, the pattern of forgetfulness did not repeat itself with this dream. Not only did it persist through my morning bath, I remembered it long enough to record it the next day. Yes, I took the time to actually record this dream in my journal.

I could not tell if the dream held any special properties beyond my ability to recall it. Years later after returning home, the dream seemed to hold some value beyond the vividness with which it was presented.

I dreamed the dream in the first months of my mission. I was blessed on my mission. The average missionary would return home after two years, only witnessing two baptisms. An article in the Los Angeles Times reported Japan as being the "Mount Everest of Missionary work". I felt the joy of meeting many times the average converts for a two year mission. Still, I felt as though I was struggling against severe odds. I felt an urgency that I had problems relating to those with whom I would speak.

I returned home feeling that my efforts were nearly in vain. A young mother and her children met me at the train station on my way to Tokyo. She expressed deep appreciation for my choosing to serve a mission. Although I've always contended that had I not been there someone else would have, she would not believe me. She knew it was only because I brought them the spirit that she learned of the truth. I could not convince her otherwise.

Years later, I was reading through my journal when I came upon the entry which contained the dream. It was only then that I realized this dream was a metaphor. My mission was very much like my experience on that beach. Millions of people had to be warned; only a few heeded that warning.

Do all dreams have such vivid interpretations? I do not think they do. Do all dreams have something to tell us? Maybe. Maybe not. We're told dreams are just visions of the work our brains are doing at night while we are sleeping - a logical description of a dream.

Compelled to Serve

Friday, I was blessed with the opportunity to teach early morning Seminary. My daughter was among the students. The class size was quite impressive, actually. I left the experience with something less than optimism in my abilities. You see, I have not recollection of ever having such a difficult time teaching gospel topics. Although the kids were a source of some trouble, other challenges were present as well.

I do not consider myself a teacher. I don’t lecture or preach. My style conforms more closely to that of a conversation instigator. I prefer to ask questions, provoking response and discussion. I did not succeed with this effort Friday. I could not cajole hardly an indecipherable grunt out of the class. What should have been a conversation of Luke 14 which would exceed the 45 minute class period, ended in less than 35 minutes.

Anyway, as just suggested, we covered Luke 14. The main thread that seems to weave through the entire chapter seems to be acting in humility to act immediately on the Lord’s bidding. We should not have to be compelled to come unto Him. Our motivation should not be out of obligation or simply a sense of duty. It should be motivated by humility and love for our Savior.

“A certain man made a great supper, and bade many: And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready. And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused. And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused. And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come. So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind. And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room. And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. For I say unto you, that none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.”

Our lives are ever increasingly busy with every minute filled with “important business”. I regularly sit on my hands in Elders Quorum, passing on many opportunities to serve. I’ve got all the great excuses. Oh, I work too far away, I pray you’ll excuse me. I have so little time with my wife and kids, I couldn’t possibly squeeze in the time to do that, I pray you’ll excuse me. I’m too tired in the evenings, I pray you’ll excuse me. I’m certain I could list 10s or 100s of excuses to put off service.

When we choose to pursue life’s other options instead of the blessings associated with living the gospel, our place at the mighty banquet will not go unfilled. How do we place a greater emphasis on the things of God and lesser importance on the worldly treasures?

A letter from Senator McCain

Cindy and I would like to take a moment to thank you for your loyal and steadfast support during the course of this campaign. Governor Palin, her husband Todd, our families, friends and campaign staff extend our deep appreciation for your tireless dedication, support and friendship.

It is the end of a long journey and your support through the ups and downs has meant more to us than you may ever know.

Although we were disappointed with the results, we must move beyond this campaign and work together to get our country moving again.

It is our sincere hope that you will join us in putting our country first and continue to work to keep our nation safe, free and prosperous.

We urge you to join us in not just congratulating Senator Obama, but offering our next president our good will and earnest effort to find ways to come together as a nation. Whatever our differences may be, we are all fellow Americans.

We are truly blessed to live in this great country and call ourselves Americans, and we will forever be her loyal servants.

Today, let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this, the greatest nation on Earth.

With warm gratitude,

Cindy and John McCain

The Greatest Men? (Part 2)

With almost a mind of its own, yesterday's post veered from the intended course. Although I haven't any empirical evidence to support my theory, I'd suggest that the greatness to which we esteem Mr. Abraham Lincoln was not the public's original opinion of the man who was killed shortly after spending all but a few short weeks of his administration fighting to hold the republic together. Over 600,000 americans died to make his cause. The south and much of the north was left in ruin. The economy was torn asunder. Complete honesty suggests few of his contemporaries considered Abraham Lincoln more than a great speech writer. History, perspective eased by years to ponder and a clearer understanding have brought most to believe Abraham Lincoln was a great president.

Before sidetracking to the vitriol that has been the tone of this blog for the past few weeks or months, the goal was to suggest George W. Bush might be credited with far more greatness than today's historians and media are willing to acquiesce.

It is probably very difficult to suggest a ranking of these 43 men that is not going to be biased by certain political leanings. The criteria by which such a task should be benchmarked has to be established in as close to an objective manner as possible. Simply going by my first thought that a President should be considered great by how well he upholds his oath of office to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States," leaves us lacking any real empirical evidence by which to judge. Still far too much room for opinion and subjectivity.

I read a suggestion that a very objective manner in which to rank the presidents would be to look at the electoral college vote. Of course, this might not give us a complete view of what actions the man may have taken while in office or how those actions affected the nation in the long term. Conversely, using this method shows a pretty clear picture and it does not completely disagree with historians.

The top ten round out with George Washington - 96.14%, James Monroe - 90.55%, Franklin Roosevelt - 88.32%, Dwight Eisenhower - 84.65%, Ulysses S. Grant - 75.40%, Bill Clinton - 69.65%, Woodrow Wilson - 67.04%, Thomas Jefferson - 64.71%, Richard Nixon - 64.46%, and Abraham Lincoln - 64.18% (75% if ignoring the southern states which had already seceded before the 1864 elections).

Since Ronald Reagan won one electoral vote in 1976 from a faithless Ford elector, his total was reduced from 94.23% (a number two ranking) to 63.44% (still ranked at a very respectable #12). The '80 and '84 elections are treated like FDR's second and third terms.

These are the voting public's view of the top ten presidents of the United States based on the electoral college. Wartime and the aftermath seems to be one of the more significant common threads. Of course, there are some exceptions.

Is this a fair way to reason out who might be the greatest of the POTUS alumni?

The Greatest Men?

A 2008 History News Network "unscientific and informal" poll among professional historians found that 98 percent believed that the George W. Bush presidency was a failure, and that 61 percent believed it to be the worst in history. Although there is little evidence now to suggest history will be much kinder than this, it may be a little early to make such a judgment. So, just how will history paint the George W. Bush administration?

“As far as history goes and all of these quotes about people trying to guess what the history of the Bush administration is going to be, you know, I take great comfort in knowing that they don’t know what they are talking about, because history takes a long time for us to reach.”— George W. Bush, Fox News Sunday, Feb 10, 2008

Considering there have been 43 United States presidents who’ve come from a broad spectrum of backgrounds from peanut farmers to scholars to military heroes, these men served their country with pride and dignity. Most of them have succeeded in the dignity part anyway. Accomplishments of this relatively small number of men are significant. They are the men who made this country into the leader of the free world and have kept it in that position for many years. Presidents like Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Ulysses S. Grant and John F. Kennedy are a few of the many great presidents that helped bring the United States to its political and economical position.

Ranking the presidents in an order of importance or greatness is one that leads to much subjective reasoning. Individual political slants will taint any objective efforts. In fact, looking at many of the polls taken and the participants of these polls, an obvious liberal slant is exposed. One such example is the poll Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. presented in the New York Times Magazine for December 15, 1996. The participants of this poll were thirty historians plus politicos Mario M. Cuomo and Paul Simon. It helps to know that the historians (and two politicians) doing the ranking are nearly all left-liberals.

The results of this poll matched up pretty well with a number of earlier polls particularly considering the ranking of presidents regarded as Great or Near Great. The three great ones were Washington, Lincoln and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Jefferson, Jackson, Polk, Theodore Roosevelt, Wilson, and Truman ranked as among the Near Great. The failures listed Pierce, Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Grant, Harding, Hoover, and Nixon. Nixon rested smack at the bottom of the list.

One of the respondents asked, “How can one evaluate such an idiosyncratic President [as Nixon], so brilliant and so morally lacking?” James MacGregor Burns certainly wore his liberal tinted glasses that day.

By what standard are we then to rank a president against his peers? Certainly, we look at a person’s job description when we consider how well they’ve performed their jobs. So, it would be best to consider the Constitution as the best place to look for the criteria of a great president. In four short paragraphs, Article II, sections 2-4 enumerate the powers of the president. It comprises but four paragraphs, most of which deal with appointments and minor duties.

Section 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

A brief and straightforward description of the President’s duties, it seems the framers and those who ratified the Constitution never intended the presidency to be a powerful office. The president’s duties are to act as commander in chief of the army and navy, but Congress alone can commit the nation to war. The president is to faithfully execute the laws that only congress can enact within the scope of its limited powers.

Looking at the polls again, it seems many have ranked past presidents based on a near sacrosanct view of political power and an idolization of those who wield it most lavishly in the service of left-leaning causes. Just look at how presidents Lincoln, Wilson and FD Roosevelt are ranked. Truman left office in near disgrace because of the Korean conflict is now admired for his use of nuclear weapons and his efforts to preserve the New Deal.

Alas, I am also content to admit my political slant when judging a president’s greatness. I seek little in the man who leads this country. I seek a man who will uphold the constitution and enforce federal laws.

I suggest the historians will ultimately put a decidedly liberal slant on George W. Bush’s administration. I suggest they will look at what Mr. President has done and in time rank him higher than they do Richard M. Nixon who remains at the bottom of the list. George W. Bush has taken more power to himself than any of his peers. He has definitely compromised the constitution and many of our liberties in the name of security. It all started after the attacks in 2001 and continued through to the administration's reaction to the financial markets just a few weeks ago. I cannot accept anything that man says without considering what he and his administration has done, blatantly disregarding many aspects of the constitution. Our government is on track to fundamental change – less than perfect change. This is not good. All these changes have been made with the promise of more security. Secure the markets by spending $700,000,000,000 of my children's children's money to buy up companies, taking private companies, using my tax money to buy stock. The government holds a controlling share of AIG. The government now owns Freddy and Fannie. Many other organizations both banks and insurance companies are now partially owned by the government. In truth, these policies smell more like liberal principles than they do conservative ideals.

Who would I rank high on my list of great presidents? It is a difficult task. George Washington was a great man. He stepped down after two terms, which established a precedent that lasted until FDR. George Washington’s sensible foreign policy served the country for well over a century.

President Coolidge sponsored sharp tax cuts and made significant strides at reducing the national debt. Of Calvin Coolidge, H.L. Mencken suggested, “there were no thrills while he reigned, but neither were there any headaches. He had no ideas, and he was not a nuisance.” Besides how can you begrudge the only president to have been born on the Fourth of July?

I’m looking for a return to a limited, constitutional government, one that does not rely on a great president.

A Day of Hope and Despair

I am conservative. I prefer to consider myself a conservative leaning independent but have been registered with a certain conservative party since I was old enough to vote. I find it very important to participate in the whole process from the primaries to the local and national elections.

I see the events that unfolded yesterday with an air of optimism and hope. I am looking at a future that holds great promise. Change is in the air. Positive change is coming our way. No, I've not taken a sip of the cool-aid. I’m not embracing the change of which the Democratic Party is preaching. I do see, however, an opportunity for a change that will provide for the long-term benefit of this country.

Why did John McCain lose? Why did the Republicans lose more than just the presidential election? This was the result of the Republicans forgetting to be Republicans. In the course of the last eight years, Republicans have been acting like a wing of the Democratic Party. This is a wake-up call. I think the Republicans need to realize they win votes by acting like Republicans and they lose votes by acting like Democrats. The Republican brand is about personal liberties over collective security. The Republican brand is about small federal government. Maybe this loss will remind the conservatives that most of our elected officials have forgotten what it means to be conservative. Maybe this loss will help to remind them who they really are. The Republicans were prideful, arrogant and the most irresponsible group of politicians our country has seen in a very long time.

It is quite interesting some have suggested McCain would have destroyed the Republican Party. Although he has made statements that seemed to be more than unconscionable such as the bailout of individual mortgages, John McCain spent most of the last eight years acting more like a fundamental Republican than most. He made enemies because he called the party out on their spendthrift ways. John McCain was one of the only Republicans to hold onto the "Small Government" pillar of the Republican brand.

This is a time for reset, a time for the Republicans to recognize what led to this downfall. The Republicans' - but more appropriately President Bush's - mantra that forces the my-way-or-the-highway style of politics has provided heaps of fowl smelling dung to fertilize this path to destruction. "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. Better it is to be of an humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud." (Proverbs 16:18-19)

No, America did not FAIL. The Republicans failed. They failed us. They failed themselves. They failed America. Unless the Republicans take heed, there will be no return from these ashes - there will be no phoenix for the Republicans. This is an opportunity to make the necessary adjustments, returning to the conservative policies that made the strong foundation of the party. This is a time to wake up and do something more than worry about the politician’s welfare and big government handouts. This is a time for change all right. A time for the conservatives to return to those values that made them strong. A time to brush off the smut, dirt and wreaking waste that has been a hallmark of the past few years, we’ve an opportunity to become strong again. It is time for a reset, a return to the true values that is conservatism. Push the reset button, now.

Conservatives must embrace this opportunity. Conservatives must reject the “mandate” Liberals feel they received yesterday. The only mandate that resulted on November 4, 2008, was a rejection of a party who lost their way. There was no reward for a group of disingenuous politicians who spent most of the past decade in a wicked state of debauchery. There was no prize for those who lost their bearings and wandered off after the glitzy but negligent policies that spend tomorrow’s fortunes and today’s liberty for short-term profit and a sense of security.

Today is the first day on the road to recovery. There is hope and today is a new day. There is plenty of room for optimism.

Elect to make your choice known

We've prepared for this day for over two years. Well, some have been preparing for this day for over eight years. Some have actually only been paying attention to what has been going on for a couple weeks. I wish that was the case for me. I have been following the politicking and campaigning since the beginning. Let me just say, I'm very happy it is the first Tuesday in November.

It has been a brutal campaign, very brutal. Both sides have spent more time talking about things and suggesting solutions that are more popular than they are effective. Promises of "95% will get a tax break" and worrying about who has been associated with who have dominated stump speeches. I'm tired of this talk about things that won't fix the problems we are facing in the economy or the security of our nation. I'm tired of flagrant abuses of government power, trampling the Constitution into the ground. I'm tired of hearing about Joe the Plumber or even Joe the Biden. I'm tired of lame politics that put blame on another party when both are responsible for the problems. I'm tired. It is good we've finally come to election day.

It is time "my friends" to make your choice known. It is time for "change we can believe in". It is time to move forward with solutions that may be hard but are for the best of the country. It is time to reach out to your representatives and senators to let them know we're watching every move they make and every vote they cast. It is time to do the right thing not the popular thing. It is time to take back our rights guaranteed under the constitution. It is time. Time.

Both campaigns have left me wondering if we were to connect a generator to the candidates' mouths, how much energy could be captured. Both campaigns have left me wondering if once the president-elect is inaugurated, will we actually do something to solve the problems with the economy? Will we take the drastic steps to put the economy and our freedoms back on the right step? Will we work toward energy independence or was this just more lip service like that we've heard every election cycle since the early 70s? Seriously, can we believe this is going to end up better than any other election we've had in the past 40 years?

Last night while I was talking with my family, I suggested I might write-in my vote. My daughter thought I said I was going to write-in Nixon. I had to laugh, of course.

Well, it is time to do the right thing. Vote your conscience. Go to that polling place and give them your all. Make your vote and do it for the right reason. Vote for those things in which you believe. First, believe in what you're doing. Believe that you're making a difference. Believe in the greatness of this system. Believe that the majority of America will make the right choice. Believe that we're still one nation under God. Believe that God will bless America. Believe that things will improve. Believe!

I am hopeful. I hope we can do the right thing. I hope congress and the new President will work out the problems in the most efficient way. I hope the "right thing" is not a harness of severe debt for generations yet unborn. I hope for the best we can be. I hope. I hope. I hope.

Who shall be our guide?

I remember some of the most memorable experiences from my childhood were those times my father led us boys on an adventure. We went off to some undeveloped place, a wilderness of sorts, and headed out to see what there was to see. Dad seemed to find places that felt to a young boy as if they were unexplored. The tails we followed looked to be forged by wild game or were dry river beds. Although the hikes weren't much more than a day trip, they were really fun.

I think about our little treks into the wilderness and realize how little they truly were when compared to the epic adventures on which the pioneers and ancient Israelites embarked. In a fashion, like my brothers and I following my father on these grand adventures into the unknown, the Israelites followed Moses into lands they had never been.

Imagine that you're about to head out on such an adventure into a wilderness where you have never been and that has not been mapped. What would you do to prepare for this journey? I think that among provisions and gear one of the more important things would be to have a good guide. You know someone who had been there before and knew of the pitfalls the journey would present. This guide would also have to be someone who would put the best interest of the company ahead of everything. His chief concern should be the welfare of those whom he guides.

When Moses and the children of Israel entered into the wilderness, their guide was our Lord. No better guide could be had and no guide would consider the welfare of their caravan any higher. The experiences the Israelites had while they took their journey through the wilderness can teach us important lessons as we journey through mortality. One of these lessons is that we can trust God to guide and care for us as He did the Israelites.

Our lives are full of choices, places where the path of life seems to split. It is times like these that we realize how much we need the help of someone who knows the better way. How can we be sure to remember Him and learn to lean on His arm?

Will security trump freedom?

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”

Samuel Adams (172-1803) American Patriot, Speech, State House of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia—August 1, 1776

Over the past few weeks, I have been very concerned by the blatant intrusions the government has made into our market. What started as an extra-constitutional "bail-out" of a flailing economy through extreme financial measures has mutated into nationalizing our banking system as well as several privately held companies. What I considered to be good men, have taken upon themselves powers that weren't granted through the constitution. My feelings about the leaders of this country have been tried.

What we are seeing happening right before our eyes is another example of how the American public can be manipulated into giving up certain rights as they seek security. Seven years ago, we suffered from an attack unlike anything our countrymen had ever witnessed. In the aftermath, many willingly argued to support the actions of our leaders as our freedoms were severely suppressed in the name of security. The likelihood that we will see a restoration of those freedoms diminishes with every passing year. My concerns addressed to my congressman and senators were dismissed with little or no consideration. At that time, most of the citizenry were on board with the changes to our world. Fear led them to believe it was necessary.

Benjamin Franklin wisely stated, "“They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.” (Respectfully Quoted, p. 201)

As we began our fight against an ambiguous enemy, these words echoed in my mind repeatedly. I worried then as I do now that we would not realize the truthfulness in this statement until it is too late.

As the markets began to collapse under the enormous pressures of the falling sub-prime catastrophe, our leaders acted again. I suggest they acted on a certain level of panic that they fostered through the media. I was heartened that I like many of my fellow countrymen were not accepting the fear mongering at face value. The initial "bailout" package was rejected summarily by the citizens of this great country. Mobilized by the significant burden this was going to place on our children and many generations to yet unborn, Americans rallied to protest this action. Whether some motivation might have emanated from the implications of nationalizing certain market sectors or businesses, I could not say. However, I was gratified that so many were moved to action in any case.

Much to my dismay, a second round of politicking was not thwarted. Both presidential candidates as well as the rest of the senate mostly signed on to the even more exorbitant bail-out package deemed a rescue plan. Those who would shy away from government interference in the financial markets embraced this 850 billion dollar monstrosity. Free-market gave way to the safe security of government intervention.

“If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades... but Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free— Americans who have been lulled away into a false security.”

- Ezra Taft Benson (1899-1994) Quorum of Twelve Apostles, General Conference—April 1968

I'm starting to sound rather a bit like those conspiracy theorists and the paranoid militant living in the backwoods of rural America. The concern, however, is real. I am not driven by extreme motivations unless you consider embracing the constitution and freedom as radical.

About the time that George Washington gave his farewell to the Republic, a British professor, Alexander Fraser Tyler, wrote: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist only until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse (defined as a liberal gift) out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a dictatorship."

Addressing the Salt Lake Rotary Club on June 8, 1976, President Spencer W. Kimball declared, “The only way to keep our freedom is to work at it. Not some of us. All of us. Not some of the time, but all of the time.”

It is time to rally to a greater cause. We need to fight for our freedoms. Let others concern themselves with security. Security at the cost of freedom is not the kind of "safety" I seek.

Whoa! Who Was Pearl Hart?

Pearl Hart was the only woman known to have robbed a stagecoach. On May 29, 1899, Pearl and a man known as Joe Boot stopped the Globe, Arizona stagecoach, relieving its passengers of something like $400. Pearl, not wanting to leave her quarries penniless, decided to give each a dollar, just "enough to eat on". This robbery is said to be the last stagecoach robbery of the Wild West.

It was the get-away that failed. Joe Boot was convicted and sentenced to 35 years at the territorial prison in Yuma. Pearl was given a 5 year sentence. The newspapers named her the "Bandit Queen". After serving 2 years of her sentence, Pearl was paroled under heavy speculation she was pregnant when released.

What drove Pearl to such resorts? She was no model citizen but she was not living a life outside of the law either. She made a decision to step out of her normal bounds.

How many people mingle with society today that are only one or two steps away from breaking down to the stresses that surround them? How can our day-by-day decisions move us toward or away from some very bad choices? You don't just decide one day to go rob a bank, vandalize public property or cheat on a spouse. On the other hand, most people cannot just decide to go pay cash for a brand new car, house or other major purchase. We cannot just decide to practice medicine one day either. These things do not happen in a vacuum.

The little things we do or do not do establish the foundation for choices we are going to make in the future. Making the right decision on a small, seemingly insignificant problem today might be the foundation for great actions tomorrow.

Pericles - revisited

Last May, I touched briefly on Pericles in one of my posts. This Athenian leader played a significant role in Greek history. Indeed, so significant was his role the period during which he led Athens, roughly from 461 to 429 BC, is sometimes known as the "Age of Pericles", though the period thus denoted can include times as early as the Persian Wars, or as late as the next century.

"Remember, too, that if your country has the greatest name in all the world, it is because she never bent before disaster; because she has expended more life and effort in war than any other city, and has won for herself a power greater than any hitherto known, the memory of which will descend to the latest posterity." Pericles' Third Oration according to Thucydides

Pericles was ambitious if nothing else. In fact, I think his ambition was ultimately his undoing. We try to teach our children to have enough ambition as to provide a foundation for success. What is too much ambition? When have we gone too far in our efforts to push for success? Will our success be measured beyond our lifetime? The lifetimes of our children's children?

Into Teh World!

I'm a geek by many widely held standards. I enjoy using the computer almost as much as I enjoy getting outside and playing with the dogs or kids. Speaking of getting outside, I think I need to get some of the bicycles fixed. It's time for a family bike ride, me thinks. That was not, however, the point of this message.

I'm one of the members of a growing club - 11 million subscribers according to one of the latest reports. I play the game developed by Blizzard called the World of Warcraft. I'm not going to disclose how much time I've devoted to this pixel based, internet phenomenon of an alter-life. I've watched lives totally altered by this alternate reality. No, no altered for the better. Some of the players play so many hours a day they are left with nothing more than sleep and food require. They even eat only out of necessity. Baths seem to be optional. Even at my height of playing this game, I was never one to pass up good food and my need for a shower at least once every 24 hours.

I realize the pull to play this game can be rather intense. If your real life (that is what people in the game call the life outside the game), if your real life is not as fascinating or exciting as you think it should be you can live a fantasy in the game that is complete with accomplishments. Even minor accomplishments are met with an instant reward.

I do very little interaction with players in the game that I don't know outside the game. I prefer to maintain relationships with people I know, people with whom I've actually shaken hands. However, the game provides an alternate reality where a community has thrived. Groups of players combine themselves into guilds and the guilds work toward common in-game goals. The goals of most guilds take priority over any personal goals the members might have. These goals exceed the importance of even those goals the members might have in their real life. Nothing is more important to the guild than the advancement of the guild. The most exclusive content in the game can only be attained when you have 25 players working in concert for hours of uninterrupted gaming. Technology provides for voice communication, which improves a guild's ability to work together. These guys are serious about the game.

If you think the draw to this game will end, you're wrong. Just at the point a couple guilds might "beat" the hardest and newest element of the game, Blizzard adds more content. Like a drug dealer, Blizzard parses new content out fast enough to keep the most fanatical players content but slow enough to keep the content flowing at a standard pace. As long as Blizzard can keep the millions of subscribers paying a monthly subscription, this cycle will continue.

Now, I've admitted I enjoy the game. At one point, I was playing a while just about every day. I've cut way back and play once a week - sometimes as infrequent as once every other week. I don't get nearly as much accomplished in the game but it provides for a more balanced life. Anyway, last week Blizzard released an update in their preparation for the next big expansion, which is going to be released in November. As part of this expansion, new pets have come to be available to the Hunter. I've one Hunter and was able to tame two of these new pets.

Although one of these guys took little effort beyond going to the cave where he resides, the other took a lot of planning and the help of a friend. Taming the Lava Core Hound found in Molten Core was made easier by having a pretty well geared Druid healer, the rocket boots xtreme and a parachute cloak. The Druid stealthed to the location of the Core Hound and waited for me to rocket/parachute cloak past the first group of monsters, where I feigned death until it was safe to move into position. I sent my temporary pet in after the Core Hound with a misdirect and healed the pet for as long as I could before he died. Upon the pet's death, I dismissed him which allowed me to start taming the Core Hound without worrying about the healing I was getting pulling the Core Hound's attention to the druid. We accomplished the taming with just the two of us.

I have had more than a few people in-game ask me about the Lava Core Hound as it is truly a rare sight due to the difficulty of taming this beast. Yeah, I'm a geek.

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?By Orson Scott Card

Editor's note: Orson Scott Card is a Democrat and a newspaper columnist, and in this opinion piece he takes on both while lamenting the current state of journalism.

An open letter to the local daily paper — almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor — which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house — along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of Congressmen who support increasing their budget.)

Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. "Housing-gate," no doubt. Or "Fannie-gate."

Instead, it was Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting sub-prime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall.com essay entitled "Do Facts Matter?" ( http://snipurl.com/457townhall_com] ): "Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury."

These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was ... the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was ... the Republican Party.

Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?

Now let's follow the money ... right to the presidential candidate who is the number-two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.

And after Freddie Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate's campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing.

If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.

But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an "adviser" to the Obama campaign — because that campaign had sought his advice — you actually let Obama's people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn't listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.

You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension — so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means . That's how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time — and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter — while you ignored the story of John Edwards's own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That's where you are right now.

It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a Senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.

If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe — and vote as if — President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.

If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats — including Barack Obama — and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans — then you are not journalists by any standard.

You're just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a news paper in our city.

This article first appeared in The Rhinoceros Times of Greensboro, North Carolina

Obedience in Spite of Our Trials

Elder Neal A. Maxwell said: “We will [not] always be rescued from proximate problems, but we will be rescued from everlasting death! Meanwhile, ultimate hope makes it possible to say the same three words used centuries ago by three valiant men. They knew God could rescue them from the fiery furnace if He chose. ‘But if not,’ they said, nevertheless, they would still serve Him!” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1994, 45; or Ensign, Nov. 1994, 35).

What can the response of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego teach us about obeying the Lord’s commandments? Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were willing to obey the Lord whether he protected them or not. Our obedience should not be conditioned on whether or not the Lord gives us an expected blessing at an expected time in return. This aspect of the gospel is not one many will relate often. In fact, quite the opposite seems to be true if you're alert during any testimony meeting. Almost everyone has a story, an experience from their life that supports their testimony of one or another principle.

My oldest daughter refused to bare her testimony because she "does not have a story to tell." Some how she felt that a testimony was made up of a story. Yes, our testimony is built on experiences but these are not always those that can easily be put into a story of blessings through obedience to certain gospel principles.

We can learn something else from the ovenproof trio. It was in the depths of their trials that they met their Savior. When the guards seized them, intervention did not come. As they approached the fiery furnace, the flames were not inexplicably put out. It was not until they were cast into the furnace that the Lord interceded on their behalf. We should not expect anything more in our lives.

As we're living our lives, trying our best to obey, how can we keep strong even when evidence of any benefit is vague? Obedience in spite of our trials. How can we maintain strength in the gospel when all seems to be combining against us?

Support the Troops - A Challenge

I've wondered at what I see as I drive to work every day. I see the yellow ribbons proclaiming support for the troops. I wonder if the support is more than the do-nothing-more-than-purchase-a-magnet-and-display-it effort. This is better than actively denouncing their actions in the two wars we are currently fighting. How much better, though? A bumper sticker or Tee-Shirt may not be enough. There is so much we could be doing to actually support these forces who are putting so much on the line for us.

Really, we have options available to us if we just seek out the opportunities.

The following Military Hospitals are known to have been treating wounded Troops from various battle zones. They are in need of: phone cards, disposable cameras, magazines, music and video CD's, tapes and DVD's, individually wrapped snacks, candy, microwave popcorn, bottled water, writing instruments, xBox games (new or used) paper and envelopes, etc. Lansstuhl expecially needs basic clothing since they are the initial staging point for wounded out of Iraq. Send items to:

Naval Medical Center, San Diego
ATTN: Marine Liaison Office
34800 Bob Wilson Drive
San Diego, CA 92134-5000

Walter Reed Medical Family Assistance Center (MEDFAC)
6900 Georgia Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20307-5001
(202) 782-2071 or toll free 1-866-546-1310,
BLDG. 2, Third Floor, Room 3E01.

Landstuhl Regional Medical Center
Attn: MCEUL-CH/Chaplains Office
CMR 402
APO AE 09180

Brooks Army Medical Center
ATTN: Judeth Markelz, Army Community Services
2010 Stanley Road, STE 95,
Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-5095

National Naval Medical Center
ATTN: SSGT Jeremiah M. Holland, USMC
Marine Liaison
8901 Wisconsin Ave.
Bethesda, MD 20889

Tripler Army Medical Center PAO
ATTN.: MCHK-IO
1 Jarrett White Road
Honolulu, HI 96859

Honor and Remember

December 29, 2005, George A. Lutz II was serving his country as part of a patrol inside Fallujah, Iraq. Corporal Lutz fell victim to a sniper’s bullet. In the months that followed Corporal Lutz’s funeral, his father visited with other families who had lost loved ones in the Iraq war. He realized two things. These families were only the most recent additions to a group that originated with the American Revolution, when the first soldiers died for our freedoms. The families of the fallen soldiers want this supreme sacrifice to be remembered and to know it was not made in vain.

On Monday, May 26, 2008, Representative Thelma Drake attended the unveiling ceremony for the Honor and Remember Flag as a special guest. George Lutz, the flag’s originator was also present. This flag combines the stars used by the military to designate service, an eternal flame and a folded American flag in its design. This flag is intended to fill a long absent universally recognized symbol that acknowledges the American servicemen and servicewomen who never made it home.

I am interested in supporting the cause established by Honor and Remember, Inc. The mission of Honor and Remember, Inc. is to create, establish and promote a nationally recognized flag that would fly continuously as a visible reminder to all Americans of the lives lost in defense of our national freedoms. All Military lives lost not only in action but also in service, from our nation's inception. For over 200 years there has never been an official national symbol that recognizes in gratitude and respect the ultimate sacrifice made by members of the United States military in service to our nation. The Honor and Remember Flag was created for that purpose.

I would encourage everyone to sign the petition at http://www.honorandremember.org/petition.html, which is a petition to establish a National Remembrance Flag. Additionally, take a moment to contact your Representative in Congress and express your support for the current Congressional Bill H.R. 7111. The congressional website provides a very nice form to help you contact your representative (https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml).

Although I tend to consider the American flag as an all purpose patriotic device, I also feel strongly that this is a good cause. This would not diminish the strength of our flag but to the contrary it would complement it very nicely. Please help me support the families of those who have fallen serving and protecting our freedoms.

Stagflation, n. stag·fla·tion (stāg-flā'shən)

Blend of stagnation and inflation.

1. Sluggish economic growth coupled with a high rate of inflation and unemployment.
   
2. 1965, apparently coined by U.K. Conservative party finance minister Iain Macleod, from stag(nation) + (in)flation.
3. An economic phenomenon of the late 1960s and 1970s characterized by sluggish economic growth and high inflation.
   

The causes of stagflation in the 1970s seem to be based on the severe increase in fuel prices compounded by the excessively stimulative monetary policies of central banks.

Does this sound familiar? Letting past experiences provide insight for future events is a smart move. If we do not draw from history's lessons, we're doomed to repeat past failures.

UFOs? Extra-Terrestrials Visiting the Earth?

Alitalia pilot Achille Zaghetti thought it was a missile. Mr Zaghetti was at the helm of a jet from Milan to London's Heathrow Airport on the evening of April 21, 1991, when a flying object streaked across his field of vision.

"At once I said, 'look out, look out,' to my co-pilot, who looked out and saw what I had seen," Zaghetti wrote in his report. "As soon as the object crossed us I asked to the ACC (area control center) operator if he saw something on his screen and he answered 'I see an unknown target 10 nautical miles behind you.' "

(USA Today reports "U.K. releases UFO files, dispels some mysteries")

Does the unexplained existence of unidentified flying objects support arguments many have made about intelligent, extra-terrestrial beings visiting our planet?

Dr. Edgar Mitchell, an astronaut who traveled to the moon on Apollo 14 and who became the sixth man to walk on the moon, suggested during a radio interview NASA personnel who had contact with extra-terrestrial aliens described them as "little people who look strange to us." He contends that real life extra-terrestrials are similar to the traditional image of a small frame, large eyes and head. Dr. Mitchell is a strong proponent for the existence of extra-terrestrial life.

Dr. Mitchell explained, "It's been well covered up by all our governments for the last 60 years or so, but slowly it's leaked out and some of us have been privileged to have been briefed on some of it."

In a statement, a spokesman said: "NASA does not track UFOs. NASA is not involved in any sort of cover up about alien life on this planet or anywhere in the universe.

"Dr Mitchell is a great American, but we do not share his opinions on this issue"

I'd thought the UFO craze had passed but it seems to be lurking in the shadows ready to come fully alive. UFO enthusiasts are jumping on this like ravaging dogs. Is my skepticism blinding me of very exciting news?