Blogs of the Month: August 06

It's been a full month since the blog-software meltdown. It's been two months since the Mavs playoffs. That means we now have a full month of blog entries not affected by either my inability to post, or the hits from Gordon Keith's site.

So, it's back to a relatively calm month for the blog. Lots of you are obviously still stopping by to read.
That's gratifying.

Thanks.

And now, for the August Blogs of the Month:

Numero-Uno:
We Were Robbed
Although the furor over the "phantom foul" post has died down, this entry still comes in at number one, by a factor of three, over its closest competition. (That's down from it being most popular by a factor of TEN last month...) My hunch is that it will continue to move down through the ranks, and drift off into obscurity. Which is as it should be for all blog entries.

Numero-Two-o:
Prairie Chapel Road
What a pleasant surprise! I can only surmise that, since Camp Casey is taking place down in Crawford, Texas once again, that many people out on the internet are searching the name of the road, and coming up with this blog on the song. I'm pleased that this one's come back around. Sadly, my life did not allow me to get back down there this year. And camp breaks at the end of this weekend. It's a real shame to be as close as I am and not to go, but it's just where life is right now. Still, I'm pleased folks are finding the song. It was downloaded another 156 times this month...making it my most downloaded song for a full calendar year.

Numero-Three-o:
Dan Fogelberg
Again, I can only surmise there's lots of folks surfing for the name, and finding the entry. Recently, several of you who have stumbled on my site have also written to say that you were sorry you missed the Tribute Show. And at least two of you have asked me if I know any updates on Dan's condition.

The show was great, and I don't know how he's doing.

My only observation is that there's not much new news coming out about Dan and his fight with prostate cancer. I hope that "no news is good news." But I'll observe that with celebrities, it often isn't.

I really want to be wrong on this, and I really hope he's doing better.

Numero-Four-o:
If Everybody Claims Victory, Does Everybody Win? (Israel and Hezbollah)
Pleased that folks read about this situation. Concerned that nothing really has happened since to resolve it. So I'll observe that this probably means there'll be more fighting soon.

Numero-Five-o
Buck O'Neil
What a pleasant surprise! I have absolutely no idea why this one got read so much this month. Is something up with Buck that I don't know about? Anyway, he's a wonderful human being, and the story of his omission from the Baseball Hall of Fame still chaps my hide. So, I'm glad others are reading about it too.

Read More

Connecting the Dots on the Cost of Immigrants

I'm back to writing on immigration issues again.

I'm not here tell you that migrant workers don't cost the American economy. I'm sure they do. Every adult in this country costs the economy something. But if we are going to have a proper debate about the costs of migrant workers to our economy, then we also need to look at what they contribute to our economy too.

This is an issue I've discussed before, but it came back to me this week because of two stories in the Dallas Morning News. The first story appeared on Tuesday, and while it was supposed to have been a story on how Parkland Hospital is petitioning the Federal Government for reimbursement of medical costs to migrant workers, the headline screamed something different:

"Migrant care costing millions: Parkland says price for nonemergency services tops $22M for year"

The second story that caught my eye ran the very next day. The story was, ostensibly, about the burgeoning black market for identity papers, such as Social Security numbers. But buried in this story about a swell in black market papers, was a fact that should have caught everyone's attention:

Migrant workers have paid billions of dollars in taxes to the federal government.

My point in juxtaposing these two stories --from the same newspaper on back-to-back days-- is that to have an honest debate about immigration, we must first be honest about what immigrants contribute to our economy. We've got to connect the dots between what migrant workers cost our economy/government, and what they contribute to our economy/government. And the truth is: they pay more in taxes than we give them credit for.

Take this one factoid:
According to the National Academy of Sciences, immigrants on average pay $80,000 more in taxes than they receive in government benefits over their lifetimes.

"How can this be?!" you say.

Well, I'll just use the examples of Dallas County (where I live).

Take city taxes, for example. Migrant workers pay virtually the exact same amount as you and me to the City of Dallas through the sales taxes they pay. Like us, they shop at Wal-Mart and Target. They shop at NorthPark and Gaston Bazzar. And every time they make a purchase, they are paying taxes to the City of Dallas, just like we do. They are helping to pay for services such as police, fire, libraries, sanitation.

But also, take county taxes. And this where the aforementioned story about Parkland comes back into the picture. The story starts off by stating the following:

"Illegal immigrants got more than $22.4 million worth of nonemergency medical care at Parkland Memorial Hospital this year, officials said Tuesday. The cost estimate was the first time Parkland has quantified how much Dallas County taxpayers are paying for such care for illegal immigrants. "It's a significant amount of money," said John Gates, the hospital's chief financial officer."

Sounds pretty scary. Sounds like a terrible free ride, on the backs of all of us.

However, what this screaming factoid fails to account for is that a slice of Parkland's revenue comes from property taxes that are, most surely, paid for by these same migrant workers themselves. Every property owner pays property taxes to Dallas County. (The story says that, on average, it's about $370/house, and $348 million to the Parkland system...) And every landlord worth his or her salt passes that cost on to their tenants in the form of rent. It's not a broken-out, special cost. But it's in there. They'd be a fool not to include it. (Unless for some reason they are intentionally trying to take some kind of business loss on a particular property...)

The point is this:
A) Most migrant workers in the greater Dallas area pay rent
B) Most landlords pass their property tax amounts on to them as part of their monthly rent, and therefore:
C) Most migrants pay about what most other apartment dwellers pay for services at Parkland Hospital.

I was disappointed that the story by the DMN didn't connect these dots together. In fact, it felt like the story was trying to do two things at once. Actually, it was a pretty good story about how Parkland is trying to get reimbursement from the federal government for the cost of migrant care. As, Parkland board member Richard Kneipper was quoted as saying: "We're trying to stop Dallas County from paying more than its fair share."

Can't blame them one bit.

What I do blame them for, however, is not connecting the dots. Because while there is a helpful breakdown in this story of how homeowners pay taxes into the Parkland system, there was no admission that some of this revenue comes from the pockets of migrant workers themselves.

Common sense tells us they most assuredly pay these taxes. Just as they pay sales tax to the City of Dallas. Just as the story the next day showed that they pay taxes into the Federal system too.

By the way, they are paying a LOT into the Federal system. It's surely not the total amount they would pay, were all migrant workers given legal documents and status. But it's billions of dollars. And these are dollars that --because the underlying personal documents are fraudulent-- none of these workers will ever see. As I mentioned earlier, the DMN story the very next day cited one expert who, using the Federal Government's own numbers, believes that there is one billion dollars in the Social Security system for every one million migrant workers.

Read that last line again.

And get this thought into your head: This is a gift to you, me, and everyone else in our country.

It is a gift from these migrant workers to the American government and economy. A gift they will never see, and that can only go to help our economy and our government's bottom line.

And can you imagine if this gift came to us another way? What if the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced that they were giving billions of dollars to the US Government?

What if they did it and said, "Use it any way you wish. It's our free gift to you."

I guarantee you, that story would be on the front page of every news channel for at least the next day. Everyone would be complimenting them on their generosity and magnanimity.

Friends, that's exactly what migrant workers are doing every day, right now. Except almost nobody's talking about it.

Another myth is that immigrants cause an increase in crime rates and therefore area burden to our justice system. This one dovetails nicely with the myths about immigrants not paying taxes. The theory goes immigrants cause excess crime, and then we have to pay for it through the taxes that we pay, but they don't. (A myth I've just tried to address.

But, the mythbusting is even more dramatic, when you consider that many studies show that states with large immigrant populations actually have a lower crime rate. The U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform has found lower crime levels among people who are foreign-born than those born in the United States.

Again, you may wonder, "How can this be?"

Well, common sense helps you here. You'd have to assume that undocumented migrants are doing their best to avoid suspicion and attention. They don't want the jeopardize their already precarious position in our society. So, they actually commit *fewer* crimes that our native-born population.

Again, I don't fault Parkland for seeking reimbursements any way they can. But I do question them singling out the migrant worker population, as if these workers pay nothing in to the Parkland system. And, if Parkland has done the analysis on what migrant workers contribute, it would've been nice to hear about it in the context of a headline that screams about how much migrant workers cost.

To my mind, migrant workers pay-in just about the same amount (proportionally, not in total dollars) as any apartment-dweller living in "The Village," or in the swanky new "W." As I said, certainly not the same dollar amount as these folks but, proportionally, about the same share. (Again, because of the cost is passed on the form of rent...)

Is Parkland going to seek reimbursement for the care of those who live in the "The Village?" If they were actively seeking reimbursement for the care of folks who live in "The Village," I wouldn't have single problem with their strategy. But since I haven't heard that this is what they're doing, it makes me wonder:

Why single out immigrants, and why now?

Without a clear answer, it feels like pandering to a hot button political issue. So, I'd love for Parkland to prove me wrong, and go after reimbursement for ALL apartment/tenant patients in the City of Dallas. Until and unless they do this, their strategy feels like pandering to the people who scream about how much immigrants cost our society.
-----------------------------------

Speaking of that, I haven't written about the furor in Farmers Branch.
What a bizarre story!!

Lemme get this straight: EVERY single major problem in Farmers Branch is attributable to a rise in immigrant population?

Oh, come on. Surely nobody with a brain takes this seriously!

Actually, the scary truth is that lots of folks probably will take him seriously.

Paradoxically, one of the provisions that O'Brien wants Farmers Branch to pass is to make it illegal to rent property to migrant workers.

Wow, now that will solve the problem!! Take away the tax base by not allowing landlords to collect rents from tenants!! If he thinks he's got a problem of a shrinking tax base now, just wait until that idea passes.

I haven't spent a lot of time in Farmers Branch lately. But my hunch is that the situation there is pretty much the same as the situation in every suburb on the northern side of town: The booming growth has moved to the North...to places like Frisco, the Colony, and even beyond. That's not the fault of immigrants. That's just the way it happens.

Twenty-five years ago, when I was growing up in Far North Dallas, we secretly cursed the success of Plano (OK, maybe not so secretly...) because it was clear, even then, that the excitement and energy of growth had moved past us.

It doesn't feel good when that kind of shift happens. But it's relatively inevitable, given the growth patterns of North Texas these past thirty years.

What's happening to Farmers Branch mirrors what happened to old, downtown Richardson fifteen-years-ago. In and around that time, dozens of Asian businesses moved in and set up shop. Now, when you drive down Beltline, you see dozens of shops (and even churches) with Chinese lettering on the storefronts.

Did some folks complain? I'm sure they did. But most folks seemed glad that someone was willing to move in, set up shop, and revitalize the area. And most of the City of Richardson today is glad to collect the taxes from all those successful businesses.

Again, I don't know the exact situation in Farmers Branch. But my hunch is, the same kind of demographic shift is happening there too. And it has very little do to with migrant workers, and everything to do with the average age of Farmers Branch residents and the folks who own properties there.

Picking on the immigrant population may make Mr. O'Brien and his friends feel good. But at the end of the day, every major problem they identify in Farmers Branch will still be there. And, if they pass their law about renting to migrants, they'll certainly see a drop in their tax base. So, here we come back to the "connecting the dots" issue again. It would be nice for the DMN and others to ask Mr. O'Brien just what his plan is for replacing that tax revenue.

Finally, it's ironic that Mr. O'Brien raises these concerns now. Because just two weeks before, the Morning News also reported that a new study shows no impact on local jobs due to migrant populations. The study is from the Pew Center, and here's a quote from that story:

"One of every six workers in Texas is foreign-born, but that hasn't hurt job prospects for native-born workers, says a Pew Hispanic Center study released Thursday. The study comes as debates over immigration policy heat up on Capitol Hill, in congressional hearings around the nation and in political campaigns.

The nonpartisan center said that during the booming 1990s, native-born workers in Texas had above-average employment rates and the foreign-born population had above-average growth rates.

The study, based on census data, also didn't find a link between foreign-born workers and employment rates for native-born workers in 2000 through 2004, when the economy slumped.

"There is no clear relationship between trends in immigration and employment outcomes for native workers," said Rakesh Kochhar, associate director for research at the Pew center.

"Others can draw the connection, but we find no relationship.""

And, the Cato Institute, a conservative think tank, recently found that a legalization program would boost U.S. household incomes by $180 billion.

I'd love for someone to connect those dots and ask Mr. O'Brien about this too. And given all these realities I've been discussing here, I'd love for someone to ask him: how are his proposals a good idea for his city? How will they actually fix the ills he says that they will?
--------------------------------

The bottom line is this:

If we are going to have a serious debate about the affect of the migrant population on our city and region, we must not only complain about the costs of having migrants among us, but we must also be willing to carefully analyze what they are giving back to us. We must take into account the gifts they are giving us in Social Security taxes. We must take into account the city and county taxes they pay.

We must honestly connect the dots, and look past screaming headlines or screaming politicians.

Read More

Too Young for Test Anxiety

For the uninitiated, TAKS stands for "Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills." It's a standardized test given to Texas school children. The descendent of tests first created during George Bush's governorship, they are required for advancement through Texas public school. And they are first given to students in the Spring of their third grade year.

And, from what I can tell, my daughter is anxious about passing it. I don't have any doubt that she will pass it. She's a very bright kid. She's made really fine grades in school so far. But she's worried. She has friends who just finished the third grade. She's heard stories about how you have to study for it, and about how you have to pass....or else...

And so, my third grade daughter has test anxiety.
About a test that she won't even be taking for another semester.

Doesn't anybody else think this is a little screwy?

I guess I should have seen this coming. Way back when Maria was on the cusp of kindergarten, we went to a parent meeting at her school. The kindergarten teachers were in attendance. The Principal was there. The idea, we supposed, was to help us new parents understand exactly what this brave new world of kindergarten would be like.

And the very first words the Principal told us were:
a) we shouldn't worry, and
b) our children would be well-prepared for the TAKS test.

I kid you not. These were the first words she said. She said something like "Welcome! We're so glad you're here. And we want you to know that your kids will be well prepared for TAKS."

Frankly, at that moment, test preparation was the furthest thing from my mind. I had no idea what TAKS was. I just wanted to know if my kid was going to get to make watercolor drawings and macaroni art.

But what I took away from that meeting was that the teachers and staff were worried about TAKS. It's not their fault. It really isn't. They are good teachers, and it's a great school. And now that I know more about the situation, I understand why it was the first thing on their mind. Because, like all public educators in our state now, they are simply trying to comply with state law and parental expectations (which are high in our part of the world...).

However, teachers and parents have seen a couple of years of TAKS now. And a lot of them don't like what they see. Because it's changed the way school is taught. In many cases, it's changed the whole nature of how and what kids learn.

New Texas laws will probably make the situation worse, not better. From an editorial in the Lufkin Daily News:
"Texas Gov. Rick Perry last year helped institute teacher pay bonuses that are tied in part to school TAKS scores. That's a great idea if all you're worried about is making scores higher; it's a terrible plan if you're wanting to reduce the incredible amount of time that students must spend on preparing for the test."
http://www.lufkindailynews.com/opin/content/news/opinion/stories/2006/08/10/eddy/TAKS_test.html

That's absolutely right, of course. If teacher pay and bonuses are tied to these test scores, where do you think the incentives will be:
A) To teach "critical thinking?"
B) Or to teach to a test?
(Choose one, and bubble-in your response. This is not the essay portion of our exam today...)

And if the goal is to raise children's educational levels, why did the legislature create this linkage between test scores and teacher pay? Why did they think THAT was a good solution?

I'll tell you why: because they wanted to be able to show they had "done something." But what they have done, maybe unwittingly, is to create a situation where the nature of teaching itself may chance.

Here's what I mean by that...

In most jobs, merit pay, bonuses, and raises are based on a yearly evaluation of a person which takes into account their overall skills and how well they fulfilled whatever their basic job description is.

So, if a teacher's financial future --and even future job security-- are based on whether or not their students perform well on a standardized test, haven't we, de facto, made this a main (maybe THE main) component of their job description? We may not actually SAY this in so many words. But if that's how they get raises and bonuses, it's more than implied.

And is that what we want of our teachers?

OK, let me answer that (this is the essay part of our test today):

It's not what I want from Texas teachers. I want teachers who, sure, can teach a kid how to pass a test. But I also want teachers who instill a love of knowledge in kids...who inspire them to begin to think for themselves, not just how to memorize answers. I want teachers who help kids see that learning is a lifelong process, that it never ends, and that it is far more than passing a test.

Teachers like that will inspire kids to think about what they will do when they grow up...what kinds of possibilities will be open to them....what kind of careers and learning they will need to get there...what kind of people they will be.

And I guarantee you this: it's why everyone get in to teaching the first place. I'll bet you a million dollars there's not a teacher alive who got into teaching because they had a burning desire to teach kids how to take standardized tests. But I fear, if we are not careful, these are the kinds teachers this laws will create in the future.

I'm all for raising standards for all children. That's a good thing. It really is. And I really have no beef with whether the test is too hard or not. Personally, I vote for hard, rather than too easy.

No, my beef is not with the idea of standards. My beef is when, in our attempt to mandate and raise those standards, we:
Devalue learning, and overvalue testing...
Create kids who are more worried about passing a test than learning to think...
Create a situation where instilling the love learning in a child takes a back seat to jumping through academic hoops...

When my third grader comes to me, worried about a test on the night before the school year starts, aren't things a little out-of-whack? Isn't that a "canary in the coal mine" to tell us that maybe, just maybe, this quest for standards has gotten a little out of hand?

I tried my best to assuage Maria's fears that afternoon. I told her what a good student she is. I told her that she had made great grades so far. I told her that I was certain she would pass TAKS, and that I knew she would work hard. But she stayed worried about it that entire afternoon. She hasn't brought it up since, but I'm sure it's not the last time she will.

Because, apparently, we live in a world where it's OK for a third grader to get test anxiety.

Read More

If Everybody Claims Victory, Does Everybody Win? (Israel and Hezbollah)

Maybe the song is too simplistic, and visualizing one of the world's long-standing conflicts as nothing more than a "sibling rivalry" is naive. But the metaphor seems to fit, to my mind.

Most sibling rivalries go on for so long that nobody even remembers quite what started them. This story starts with two "half brothers" whose metaphorical descendants become the tribes of Israel and the tribes of Arabia. Two of the world's great religions come from these two small boys.

There is a verse in Genesis where it says that they are simply, innocently, playing in the sand. It's an image I like to keep in my mind. I like to imagine: what if we could strip back the layers of emnity, and just get back to that moment? What if we could bottle that moment, and bring it forward into our all-too-adult world?

The moment doesn't last. Their father and mothers get involved in the situation, and pretty soon it's clear that the valley isn't big enough for the both of them. (Even though they are probably the smallest humans there!!) And so, these two boys are put at odds with one another, through the jealousies and bitterness of their parents.

How often are the failings of adult children traceable to the things their parent's taught them to hate?

Of course, Christianity comes out of this same soil too. Three of the world's great religions all tie back to this same father, these same two mothers, and that tiny sliver of real estate.

Isn't there something to be said for seeing someone as family? Or, has this sibling rivalry gone so long that nobody can the "others" as related to them at all.

I cannot condone what Hezbollah has been doing in southern Lebanon. Israel is absolutely correct to point out that they have violated the terms of a previous peace agreement by arming a buffer zone that was supposed to provide everyone with a little space. And Israel is right to ask questions about how we would act if another government or group had all that kind of armament pointed our way, just across our border. I mean, think back to the Cuban Missile Crisis. We almost saw World War III when some missiles were 90 miles away from us. How would be react if, as is the case now, we were facing down missiles a mile across the Canadian border? (Work with me here, it's a hypothetical...)

On the other hand, I cannot condone Israel's major offensive based on the kidnapping of two soldiers. It appears for all the world that they have wanted to go into southern Lebanon for years, but simply have not had the "pretext" to be able to make the move. By all accounts, these war plans have been drawn up for a long time, and they were waiting...just waiting...for some shoe to drop. The kidnapping of two of their soldiers was that shoe, and the assault began.

It would be nice to have an....oh, I don't know...Superpower that might step in at such a time and force both sides back to the table. Tony Blair tried to sell that idea to President Bush at a world summit recently. But apparently Bush was already too busy at his own table, eating a dinner roll, to be bothered with it.

But, let's say we HAD gotten involved and gotten involved early. What would say to Israel? In a world where "pre-emptive war" is now seen as an appropriate policy strategy, who are we to argue with them? By which I mean: given our own pre-emptive war --fought on trumped up moral grounds that have since crumbled like desert sand-- who are we to judge what they do?

Perhaps this is why the Administration seemed to act so slowly in this case. Not only because, politically, some in the Administration wanted Israel to have the time to fight this war; but also because, morally, what could we really say to them:

Please stop....we don't think this is right?
Please stop...we'd certainly never do anything like this?
Please stop...you don't see how this will just make things worse in the region?

I mean, which of these could we actually say, in good conscience?

So, we said nothing. We stood by, mutely, eating our dinner rolls. Abandoning what shreds of moral authority we had left.
----------------------------------------

So, what happens now?

Israel's in a heck of a pickle, because Hezbollah now seems much stronger (militarily) than they counted on. Therefore, doesn't Israel look "weak" and vulnerable if they don't continue fighting? But what happens if they do? (Hint: can you say, "Bagdad?") It's a heck of a pickle. And once you've started something like this, where is the place you can stop? And when have you really made yourself "safer?"

For Hezbollah, there are risks too. The people of Lebanon may turn on them. They've certainly rejected Syrian-installed leaders before. Maybe the Lebanese will rise up and throw the bullies out. It's certainly a risk Hezbollah faces now. Or, the exact opposite may happen...ie, these leaders that Israel believes should bear the responsibility for this conflict may actually grow stronger in the eyes of the ordinary Lebanese people. (Hint: can you say "Bagdad?")

Israel continues to enjoy strong support from the United States, and especially from those of us who are members of the third great religion of that region: Christianity. But I hope everyone (Israelis and Jews especially) understand that some of this support comes from ultra-conservative Christians who really do not have Israel's self-interest at heart.

For them, it's about theology more than politics. Many of these ultra-conservative Christians believe in Israel's right to exist, not as a successful sovereign nation, but as the first pawn in a coming Apocalypse. Their strange brand of theology tells them that the world cannot end UNLESS there is an entity called "Israel." Israel MUST exist, because the Bible says it must. And the Bible says it, so they believe, because that's how the world ends.

So, it has nothing to do with who Israel is as a nation, or what Israel's best interests are as a state. And I would have my friends who are supporters of Israel to at least pause and take this to heart. I hope it makes them a little uneasy.

The Arab/Palestinian/Muslim side of this conflict also often enjoys support from Christians. Usually from liberal end of the theological spectrum.

These folks see the conflict in stark "justice" terms:
strong Israel vs. weak Palestine.
powerful landlords vs. evicted settlers.

And there is truth to their analysis. Just as the Bible has apocalyptic sections that talk about the end of the world (probably meant to be taken metaphorically), so too the Bible has sections that talk about justice for the oppressed and downtrodden (probably not meant to be taken metaphorically).

But here too, sometimes I fear that these liberal Christians (the folks I hang out with most often...) don't see the Arab/Palestinian/Muslim side as real people either, but as symbols for the "downtrodden." As such, sometimes progressive Christians seem too willing to excuse terrorist acts, and random violence as justifiable responses. They don't come right out and say they support such acts. But their silence often creates the exact same kind of moral vacuum that the President created when he just sat and ate his dinner roll.

We must condemn violence on all sides. We must implore everyone in the region to try and see the conflict through the eyes of the "other."

Both Jews and Christians share the Hebrew Scriptures, and this past Sunday in our church the lectionary reading was from Samuel. It was the from the section where King Solomon had just finished building his glorious temple....a site still fought over to this day by all three of these great religions.

The temple took 30 years to complete. It required a vast expenditure of resources and human capital, including men who we conscripted into virtual slavery as temple construction workers. But finally, the Temple is done. And Solomon gathers to offer a prayer. He prays for wisdom and guidance for all the people. And then, during one part of the prayer, Solomon says this:

"As for the foreigner who does not belong to your people Israel but has come from a distant land because of your name- for men will hear of your great name and your mighty hand and your outstretched arm—when he comes and prays toward this temple, then hear from heaven, your dwelling place, and do whatever the foreigner asks of you, so that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your own people Israel, and may know that this house I have built bears your Name."

What would it be like if everyone in Jerusalem could respect the prayers and supplications of everyone else? What would it mean if each great religion were to say to its own extremists:

"We must all coexist together in this land, because it's a spiritual inheritance for us all. The descendants of this land all trace back to two half brothers, who, for a brief time, coexisted as God's children. Let us work to create such a land again."

Wouldn't that be great?

I'm not holding my breath. But I truly do believe that such an idea is the only path to true peace. And perhaps it's more of a religious and spiritual truth that needs embodiment than a political one that needs negotiation.

Because the descendants of those two half brothers continue to fight, right down to this day. And it doesn't matter who started it anymore. It really doesn't. The only thing that matters is how it ends. And if the region is to survive, then there are ways that all sides can come to coexist.

Because the one thing I know for sure is that this is a war that can never be "won."

Read More

A Tribute to the Eagles and Chicago (An Upcoming Show)

The core of the "Living Legacy" band is back. Doing Chicago means we obviously have to have a strong horn section. And, after rehearsal last night, it appears that we do. Phil West is anchoring them on sax. Cornell Kinderknecht is back with more great woodwinds. The horn section is really working on learning their parts, and they're good...they sound much tighter than we did at this point in the Fogelberg rehearsals.

Somebody associated with Spring Valley knows a lot of the members of Chicago, and has been able to secure some memorabilia --signed pictures such-- that we'll be auctioning off during the show to raise additional money. We ended up raising just over $ 2,500 last time. I see no reason why we can't exceed that this go around.

I have a set list, I just don't have it with me tonight. So, check back here in the next few days, and I'll update this entry...

I'll be singing at least the following:

Eagles:
Lying Eyes
Best of My Love
Desperado

Chicago:
Saturday in the Park
Make Me Smile
Color My World
Dialogue (the Peter Cetera part)

I may well be singing on some other stuff too. We'll see. I'll be doing background on just about everything, and playing acoustic guitar through out. (Really pumped about being able to play "Beginnings," and all the Eagles stuff...which I already know...)

I've already blogged my love for the band Chicago. I suppose I now need to write something about the Eagles too. Stay tuned.

The one thing I can tell you is that the horns sound GREAT so far. And the Eagles harmonies are dead-on.

So, it's going to be a GREAT, GREAT show. Any of you who were at the Fogelberg show know just how fantastic it was. This has all the makings of being yet another magical night.

Make plans to attend now. You won't want to miss it.
--30--

Read More

30 Days (A TV Show You Should See)

The show comes from Morgan Spurlock, who brought us the award-winning documentary, "Supersize Me!" If you'll remember, the premise of that film was that Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald's food for 30 straight days to see just what, if any, affects it would have on his body and health.
If you saw the film, you know that the results were shocking.

Spurlock takes that same basic premise --that 30 days is long enough to really challenge someone's beliefs-- and applies it to many life situations. Every episode takes on one of the dichotomies of modern life in America:

A Christian spends 30 days living with a Muslim family...
An Atheist spends 30 days living with a Christian family...
A border-patrolling "Minuteman" spends 30 days living with a family of immigrants...
Spurlock (and his now wife) spend 30 days trying to live on minimum wage...
A pro-choice woman spends 30 days living in a pro-life-run maternity home...

You get the idea.

The results are varied. Sometimes, during the hour-long dramas, the rethinking of moral and social views are dramatic. Sometimes, everybody goes home with much the same opinions they came with. But it's never dull.

In an effort to give the show a ratings boost, FX featured a "30 Days Marathon" today. So, we TiVoed a couple of episodes we'd missed. One that captured both of our hearts --and brought tears to both our eyes-- featured an immigrant family and a "Minuteman" who is staunchly opposed to immigration. In an added twist to the plot the Minuteman, Frank, is himself an immigrant: having come legally with his family from Cuba when he was just a boy. But although he speaks the language, and shares a cultural heritage with this family, he is staunchly opposed to them.

However, after a month of living with them, walking in their shoes, and understanding their life, he finds himself unable to hold his old, hard-line positions. The hour drama was gripping to us, not only for the heartfelt stories of real-life human beings trying to make their way in the world, but also because of the specific issue of immigration. (Which I have written about before)

It's an episode everyone should see. So if you have TiVo, make every effort to record it, because I'm sure it will be on again.
---------------

What's fascinating about this show to me is that it has a very anti-TV premise. Every character, every show (even a reality show), has some kind of "slant" to it.

Jessica Rabbit once said, "I'm not bad....I'm just drawn that way."

If nothing else, there is at least the way the TV stories are edited. We, the viewer, are not able to see the REAL people on the shows. We're encouraged to see in a kind of character-shorthand. We're encouraged to see the symbols, stereotypes and myths that the characters represent.

Paradoxically, as we sit in our own small family units, in front of the glowing screens, we don't so much get our minds changed about anything, as we get our own preconceptions confirmed.

This show, however --while it still offers up characters that represent various moral/social stereotypes-- also challenges us to get behind those assumptions and stereotypes...to get behind what we've learned in schools, churches, from parents, (And yes, even from TV...) and to try to see other human beings as they really are, and not just as our prejudices (pre-judging) would have us see them.

The show's executive producer, RJ Cutler, says this about it:
"The topics for this season of 30 Days are the most pressing social issues facing our country. While the media covers them in broad strokes, 30 Days presents these issues in real terms with real people living well outside of their comfort zones. As with last season, we hope the series leads to discussion among viewers, who are sure to learn more about themselves."

Along these lines, the 30 Days website not only features a page where people can write in their own future story ideas, but also a message board where passionate contributors offer up their own views on the hot moral issues discussed on each episode. How many TV shows do you know with a website that inspires that kind of response?

Watching several of the episodes, I was reminded of my own experiences in Russia.

I got the chance to go to Russia nine times over about an eight year period. Several of the early trips, I had the high honor of staying with an actual family in their home. We ate, slept, shopped, and visited with them about politics, religion, the Cold War, family life, music, art...etc...etc...

It was a powerful thing --in the early 1990s-- to spend a 10-day stretch with folks who had, once-upon-a-time, been our enemies. It certainly changed the way I saw them.

This show does the same thing for many of the folks who are on it.

And, just maybe, it will challenge you to grow in your own human empathy and compassion for other people. Maybe it will challenge you to consider what another person's shoes feel like.

But even if it does none of this, it's still better than the junk that makes up 99.9 percent of the rest of the TV schedule.

So why not give it a shot?

Read More

Questions that Keep My Up at Night (After a Foiled Terrorist Plot)

Why is our "Homeland Security" Department still wasting so much money?
Despite this stunning and deft capture of terror suspects, the facts are that our government is wasting billions of dollars in a so-called War on Terror. I say "so called" not because we shouldn't fight terrorism --we should. But some of the ways we're spending money to "fight" terrorism defy all logic and credulity and make me question whether we're really serious about it or not.

For example, as I write these words, and since its creation a few years back, our Homeland Security Department has spent close to half a trillion dollars. Some of this, I am sure, has done great good. But, our government is also wasting billions of dollars to catalogue targets that can't possibly have anything to do with terrorism.

As just one example of how bad it's gotten, Indiana (not exactly the first state that leaps to my mind) apparently has more terrorism targets on the government's official list than New York or California. Seems a little odd, no?

The folks at the Daily Show thought so, and as usual, they are right on the mark with their lampoon of this insanity.

And, as if it couldn't get any more surreal, there are stories that some of the pork-barrell projects coming out of Homeland Security may actually go to benefit the regime of Hugo Chavez. I kid you not. Read for yourself.

The Washington Post recently ran a story that detailed much of these same issues too.

It said:
"In the years since Bush stood atop the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center and pledged retaliation against "the people who knocked down these buildings," the federal government has undergone an unprecedented expansion and reorganization.
Yet the counterterrorism infrastructure that resulted has become so immense and unwieldy that many looking at it from the outside, and even some on the inside, have trouble understanding how it works or how much safer it has made the country."

We've spent almost half-a-trillion-dollars on this stuff.

Do you feel half-a-trillion-dollars safer?

Why have we not caught Osama Bin Laden?
Incredulously, earlier this year, the CIA disbanded its group that worked exclusively on tracking Bin Laden. They did so because they argued that the terrorism threat had expanded so exponentially that it was useless to simply focus on him alone.

But terrorism experts are saying that this week's foiled plot looks an awful lot like a foiled Al Qaida plot from the mid-90s. And, whether he's still a threat or not, he's still he guy most responsible for the most horrendous attack in our history. And yet, almost nobody talks about him anymore.

How is that possible?!!!

And why are we still fighting a War in Iraq that has nothing to do with stopping terrorist attacks like this?
As the hot days of summer roll on, hotter news has pushed the war right out of our minds. The situation in Israel/Lebanon is "hotter." This foiled terrorist plot is "hotter."

But lest we forget, there's still a war going on in Iraq.

We're being told that our top generals now admit that "civil war" there is a distinct possibility. There's absolutely no question that Iraq is now the world's largest crucible for new-terrorist-creation. Iraq is churning them out at a rate that will surely astound us all.

And, just this week, my own hometown newspaper, The Dallas Morning News, came out with a scathing editorial about the conduct of the war by our administration. Titled "What We're Doing Isn't Working" here's a part of what they said:

"Three years after the overthrow of Saddam, the American military is still fighting to control Baghdad. Whatever this is, it's not progress.
Facts on the ground are rendering President Bush's vision of a united Iraq increasingly untenable. The forces of sectarian hatred tearing the country apart are growing stronger than the forces keeping it together. The U.S. military is being asked to reconstruct a nation that's apparently more interested in deconstructing itself.
What we're doing isn't working, and this late in the game there is little reason to assume things will change. It's time for Plan B – which probably means working out, in conjunction with regional powers, some credible and enforceable partitioning of the country."

You know it's bad when the DMN will print this kind of editorial.

Cindy Sheehan is back in Crawford, Texas because the President in on vacation there too. And whether you love her or hate her, I appreciate her willingness to keep the war in front of us all. As of this writing, 2,600 Americans have lost their lives, as have tens of thousands of Iraqis. Cindy Sheehan is still asking the question "What is the Noble Cause?"

It's still a good question.
---------------------------------------------
So, although the world is preoccupied with the "what if" questions of a foiled terrorist attack this week, I guess I'm just weird. Because I'm still asking the "why" questions:

Why all this Homeland Security fraud?
Why no capture of Bin Laden?
Why still a war with no clear purpose or strategy?

Those are the questions that still keep me up at night.

Read More

Ed Upton

Dr. Ed Upton
A Eulogy Given at Northaven UMC
June 24, 2005

I cannot remember the first time I met Ed Upton. Which is to say that I was too young at the time to remember the first time I knew Ed Upton. You see, although I would not know it until years later, the man I met here at Northaven Church, who would be such a mentor to me here, had already been a mentor to me years before.

I found this out on the day I first do remember meeting Ed Upton. It was after I had been appointed here at Northaven Church, and Ed was a member of the staff parish committee. And before I actually got here, Ed called me up over at Highland Park, and invited me to go to lunch.

Ed was a member of Staff Parish, so this was not that unusual. But I would come to learn that Ed probably would have been that proactive anyway. He was a bit of a busy-body, as many of you know.

So, we met up the street at Mainstream Fish House, and Ed set about asking me some gentle, but probing questions, about who I was and where I had been. And in the process, I mentioned that as a kid I had attended Lovers Lane United Methodist.

To which Ed asked, "What years were you there?"

I told Ed the years, and he thought for half a second, and then asked,
"Where you confirmed there?"

And I said that, yes, I was confirmed there.

And Ed, with some astonishment in his voice, said "I was in charge of your confirmation."

And so it was that I first learned that Ed Upton had been a spiritual mentor to me, long before the adult me would come to know the man I knew as Ed Upton. Ed would become a trusted advisor and friend to me, here at Northaven.

Like many of you, I came to call Ed my friend.

In fact, that very first re-meeting of Ed Upton at Mainstream Fish House taught me two very important things that I know you will all agree was true about Ed Upton's life:

1) Ed lived an interesting life and did many fascinating things.
2) Ed knew just about everybody, and was a friend and mentor to many,
many people.

These past few years, as Ed has struggle with cancer, many of us who knew Ed have been astounded to find friends literally coming out of the woodwork.

Friends that Ed knew back in Mississipppi...
Friends from Lovers Lane...
Friends from Northaven...
Friends from the Dallas community...

Ed Upton was a man with an astounding number of friends. And Ed knew how to BE a good friend. We often say about people, "Oh yes, he had many friends," but Ed REALLY DID!

One of my favorite memories of Ed was as a member of our church's nominating committee. Ed knew everybody. I mean Ed knew everybody! And not only did he know everybody's name, he knew something ABOUT everybody.

He would come to our nominating committee meetings with double-handfulls of handwritten notes about people...thoughts about who would be good to serve on what committee. And he was almost always right. He could size up a person's strengths and weaknesses.

And if he didn't know somebody, he would want to know them. Sometimes in those meetings, we'd come across a name of someone Ed didn't know --perhaps a new member-- and he'd say, almost as if it was a personal moral failing "Gee, I don't know that person!"

He really did get dissapointed if he didn't know someone. And so, then, if you'd start to describe the person, you could see the wheels turning inside Ed's head...he would be making mental notes about this person you were describing...trying to remember them, in case he needed to know them later.

Ed was a person who made an effort to KNOW his friends, and to keep up with his friends. Sometimes, this was maddening for the friends. Because, let's be honest, Ed could sometimes be a busy-body. Ed liked to get into other people's business. Sometimes, Ed even liked to gossip...with that impish grin of his....

But he always did it out of care for a person....and his ability to make and keep friends knew no bounds.

If you were a friend of Ed's, you had to be ready to have him tell you what he thought. Because he would. Ed would tell you his opinion on just about everything, whether you asked for it or not! Ed would, sometimes bluntly, tell you what you were doing right, and what you were doing wrong!

But you always appreciated his sincerity, and you always knew that behind it all, Ed cared.

Ed was always smiling, and always finding ways to relate to people. But, Ed could also be a curmudgeon. Ed could be one of the most stubborn people you will ever meet...and when he decided that things would be a certain way, it was sometime hard --no, it was sometimes IMPOSSIBLE-- to get him to change his mind.

There is a set of folks who cared for Ed in these last two years who, I believe, merit mentioning here and now. They are folks in his family, and close friends from his life whose names we must raise up today.

-- Lynn Daniels saw him through many trips to the hospital and brought him food and comfort when he was going through his chemotherapy.

-- Kay Warrick and Sandra Washburn, from here at Northaven, stood with Ed for hours on hours during his last months, not only taking him to appointments, but being at his beck and call much of the time.

-- Roger Dube, a good friend first to sister and brother-in-law, became his good friend, and would fly in from his home to spend weeks at a time with Ed.

Steve Leija, spent many nights with Ed, in his home, caring for him all through the nights, and sending emails to Ed's large circle of friends about his condition.

I want to mention Ida Loise Noblin, who has been a fifty-year friend to Ed. Ed once described for me the pain and anguish of his leaving the ministry at Lovers Lane UMC. Both Ed and the world were discovering that he was a gay man. And this meant that he would be forced from his position at Lovers Lane. Several times, Ed told me the story of the horrible day when the news became public. And that Ed simply sat in his office, unable to move, unable to answer the doors. Person after person knocked on that door. But Ed simply sat at his desk.

He waited until late in the day when he assumed everyone had finally gone home. And only then did he open his office door, only to discover a woman patiently sitting on the steps, waiting for him.

It was Ida Loiuse Noblin. Ida Loise was a friend who stood by Ed, and waited outside the door, knowing that he needed her friendship.

Mike Upton, Ed's son, made several trips to see his Dad in these last years, and the two of them shared a special bond. Ed was so proud of Mike and of all he accomplished, and bragged about him every chance he got.

And finally, there are two folks whose love and care for Ed were matched only by his love and care for them: Ed Poole and Dee Wylie. Ed Poole was Ed Upton's brother-in-law. Ed, Ed's sister, and Ed Poole have all known each other almost their entire lives.

When Ed Upton's sister was dying of cancer just a few short months ago, Ed went to stay with Ed Poole and "sister" for six weeks.

Ed Poole has returned the favor. I don't know that I've ever known a brother-in-law so committed to his brother-in-law than Ed Poole was to Ed Upton. Ed, your love and care for Ed Upton was truly remarkable and inspring to us all...and now many of us here in Dallas are now proud to call you our friend.

And Dee Wyly. Dee and Ed have also known each other almost their entire lives....since the first grade....that's about as far back as you can go, really. Dee describes Ed Upton as the brother she never had. And I know that Ed loved her as a sister too. Ed used to brag about Dee...used talk about their friendship.

Well, I have seen it in action. I have seen it in action, as Dee has gone with Ed to the hospital, to the nursing home...and finally, has sat with him for hours and days in these last weeks.

Dee and Ed, you stood by Ed Upton in a way that truly moved me to see. Your care for him...your support of him, was truly remarkable. You three share a bond of experience and love that no one can truly know the depths of...and I know, because he told me, that Ed was extremely grateful to the two of you.

The question I got asked the most these past few months was "How is Ed doing, and can we go see him?"

The answer was often that he wasn't doing very well, and that he really didn't want to see people. I wish he had opened his doors to see more folks these past few months, but that was his choice, and we must always respect that kind of choice.

I think a lot of it came from the fact that Ed was a control freak at
heart. And when you have cancer you don't really control very much. But it's not to say he didn't care for and love each and every one of you here in this room. But --and this is my own anaylsis-- I think he wanted to be more in control than he could be when he saw folks.

Sometimes when folks die, we say that we can never replace them. And if we are honest, many times we don't mean it. Of COURSE we'll replace them...of course other leaders will come along in their place. That's the humbling thing about life...that life goes on, and that new leaders emerge.

But friends, I truly do believe in Ed's case, we'll never replace him. I truly believe that the best thing we can do is to learn from Ed's example and life...and to try our best to continue to live out the lessons he taught us...knowing full well that we'll never replace him.

To that end, let me say a few of the remarkable things that I will take forward with me about Ed's life...

First, Ed taught me how you can support the United Methodist Church, be a part of it, and still not accept all of it's flaws and want it to change.

Based on stories Ed told me of his life, I think I am confident in saying this next thing: I don't personally know anyone else who had more reason to be angry at the Methodist Church than Ed did. I know very FEW people with as much of a reason to be angry with God as Ed did.

I do not know anyone else who had more reason to --and I mean this next line theologically-- tell the United Methodist Church to go to hell.

But, rather remarkably, Ed didn't do that. It's not to say he didn't have a dark night of the soul, and years of struggling to come to terms with his connection to the church. He did have that.

But the Ed Upton I knew remained a committed Methodist to the day he died. He knew more about the Methodist Church 98 percent of the world. If we were planning to put someone on a committee here, or hire someone on the staff, it was Ed who always wanted to make sure they had a Methodist connection.

So, Ed taught me a lot about how someone who had every reason to leave the Methodist Church, to be mad at God, could remain a committed part of a Methodist Community of faith. It was a remarkable witness to his own ability to find peace, even in a church who caused him pain...and that witness is a gift to us all.


Ed taught me a lot about how to LOVE LIFE. Ed LOVED life. Ed didn't want to die. Ed fought death with every fiber of his body. Ed, as you may know, outlived his initial cancer diagnosis by about a year and a half.
And that truly was a great achievement. But it wasn't enough for Ed!!!

He was not happy about dying. He was not happy about it one bit. Ed didn't have a lot of use for worrying about heaven, because Ed was too busy living life on earth.

And what a great lesson THIS is too: Would that all of us can love life the way Ed loved life. Would that all of us could LOVE LIFE with the PASSION AND EXUBERANCE that Ed loved life.

Even though Ed wanted much more time than simply two more years, these past two years have allowed Ed to do a lot of things he wouldn't have been able to do otherwise.

He got to see this new church. He got to see be here and worship here, and see us move in. Ed LOVED Northaven Church with all his being...and I am so grateful that he was able to see this new place.

He got to talk to his son, David, for the first time in years. Even though it was little more than a short conversation, I know Ed was grateful for that chance.

He got to spend some quality time with his son, Mike. Mike came to town with a copy of Mike's new movie, "Akeela and the Bee," and the two of them shared a special weekend. Ed was so proud of Mike and talked about him all the time. Ed never passed up a chance to brag about Mike.

He got a chance to see a whole host of grade-school friends from Mississippi, who made a special trip here to Dallas to see him. Dee was in on this one too. Lots of Ed's old, dear, childhood friends, came to show their love for him...to brighten his day....and he was surprised and grateful for this time.

He got the chance to go back to Yazoo City one last time. Dee, Ed Poole, and Ed flew back there and made one last trip around. I know it was a powerful experience for all of them. And I know, because he told me, that it meant a lot to him.

In short, Ed continued to LOVE LIFE these past two years. He continue to love life right up until his final days too.

And would that we might ALL love life the way Ed did....

Because Ed loved life, Ed was not big on worrying about heaven. He did not talk a lot about heaven...he didn't want to. He didn't really want to think about it. My hunch is that it was because heaven is not something he could control. His life? At least until the cancer, he could control a lot of that. But heaven?

But I will say, on Ed's behalf, that I do believe in the life that never ends. I do believe in a place where truly kind and generous souls like Ed reside forever....whether it's anything more than in the mind of God, we may all never know until we're there. But I think it's a "somewhere."

Life has a way of regenerating itself. Our deepest pains have way of becoming the breaking point where new life can be born.

I think it's said quite well in the hymn that we will sing to close our sevice in just a moment. As you might imagine, control-freak that he was, Ed picked out the hymn. Ed had very specific instructions about this service, and we've tried to honor them.

But this last hymn, Hymn of Promise, says a lot about our hope for a life that never ends:

In our end, is our beginning,
In our time, infinity
In our doubt, there is believing
In our life, eternity
In our death, a resurrection
At the last, a victory
Unrevealed until it's season,
Something God alone can see.

I believe that Ed is there in that place beyond death, where ever and what ever it is. I like to imagine that he's already being a busybody. That he already knows the names of most of the angels, and has already given God a list of how they can be better employed.

And when I think of Ed being in that place --a place he didn't want to go to because he didn't want this life to end-- I think back to that image of Ida Loiuse Noblin, waiting for Ed on the steps at Lovers Lane Church.
I think of her being that kind of friend to him in that moment, when he didn't want to step out of that door.

You see, Ed was the kind of friend that waited on the steps for many of us too. He stood by us in our times of need.

So, Ed didn't want to open the door of death. But I truly believe that when it opened for him, what he found was our loving God, sitting on the steps, waiting for him

....ready to love him
...ready to recieve him into the heavenly kingdom
...ready to guide Ed as they walked through that door together.

Thanks be to God for God's goodness and grace. And life that never ends.

Amen.

Read More