The PT people have been pretty spectacularly good. Little scary at times as I have been hooked up to electrodes and placed on a traction machine, but all of their treatment has helped tremendously. I think it will still be some time before that disk returns to something approaching normal, and even then, as my therapist noted yesterday, I will have to be "on my game" in how I lift and how I tend to my core strength.
The news is still about the bailout, but it appears that strange bedfellows has a chance to pull together conservative Republicans and Democrats in challenging this blank check. If you want some humor regarding the bailout, Jon Stewart last night had a clip of some news person explaining how much 700 billion was in McDonald's apple pies. He also noted that our still President explained the banking crisis as a "house of cards." Nice.
And the Nation's Christopher Hayes has this amazingly funny satire. Yes, our top economic advisors are now similar to those poor Nigerian refugees that need our help.
Because the subject is never far from my mind, I note this from one of Sully's readers:
"I just finished reading 'The Dark Side' and one of the things that struck me the most was the fact that so many of the people involved in condoning and justifying torture in the administration were devout Christians. And yet few if any of these people, up to and including the Christian-in-Chief, seem to have had any hesitation or misgivings about these practices.I made this point before when I suggested that Mel Gibson might remake his film to reflect this inconsistency.
Correct me if I am wrong; but these are the same people who claim that the example of this 1st Century Pacifist who was himself tortured to death is the guiding lite in their lives. I don't get it."
Speaking of Christian conservatives, this story from the Christian Post is just too funny. (Tony beat me to the story, but said I could still blog about it.) Lifeway bookstores pulled an edition of Gospel Today Magazine becaus the front cover featured five women pastors and conservative evangelicals worried exposure to female pastor might lead to dancing and voting Democratic.
Ok, I made that last part up, but it is just too funny to watch the gymnastics. Female pastors? Hell no, but no problem if those same women were nominated (by a Republican only) to the Veep spot.
Richard Land, president of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, also weighed in the topic of women serving in leadership roles in his recent commentary on women and the election.Yeah, oddly that requirement that women not usurp authority over men doesn't apply to Sarah Palin. Todd will still be the boss of her, so that is ok.
He rejected misunderstandings that the denomination wants women to be "subservient" to men, citing the SBC's confession of faith that states woman and man are "equal worth before God."
But he drew from teachings in the New Testament to support the Southern Baptist position on women pastors. In 1 Timothy 2:12, "the Apostle Paul instructs that 'a woman is not to usurp authority over the man,'" explained Land.
"Most Southern Baptists have understood this to mean that women are not to be pastors of local churches, since the pastoral office is a position of authority," he said.
Although the denomination doesn't agree with women serving as pastors, said Land, it does not oppose women serving in leadership roles in public service, such as the vice presidency.
Ok. Whatever. This "up is down" thing is kind of funny to watch. Since unwed pregnant teenagers have become a good thing (in certain families), I am now waiting for an affair to become a sign of good Christian faith. Oh wait.