My friend, Lindsey, gave me the news earlier this week.
Doctors found cancer in her brother Eric's pancreas last Friday. He is 25.
Lindsey's family was devastated.
I prayed for them.
I prayed as an older member of my church once suggested, by asking for a miracle. Hey, it sure doesn't hurt to ask.
I was going to write a note to the Uplift Team at church today, in fact, to get some help in prayer.
Just now, however, Lindsey texted me:
"You will never believe this. I still don't. They called this afternoon and said it was a fluke.
"There was nothing there.They did the test over twice and his pancreas is completely normal.But the test they did last Friday...the doc was sure it was cancer.It's unbelievable.They said it must've just been a shadow, but these docs are the best of the best...."
Nope, I said.They may be good, but they aren't The Best.
Choose to explain this any way you wish. My feeling is...for those who read this and who are not Believers...here's your invitation!
Praise God.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Monday, July 19, 2010
Another Chicago Cop Murdered
I'm damned angry. If you live, and vote, in the city of Chicago, you should be, too.
Officer Michael Bailey was 62, just weeks away from mandatory retirement.
A Chicago police officer for twenty years, he was shot in his own driveway. He was still in uniform, having returned home after a shift spent guarding Mayor Daley's home.
Think about that. He was in uniform! What does that say about the people who attacked him? What does that say about the climate of violence in that one South Side neighborhood? In fact, he's the second off-duty cop still in uniform to be killed this month.
How ironic that he was part of Mayor Richard Daley's security team. Mayor Daley, the guy who says the city's wallet is empty and he can't afford to hire more cops. Mayor Daley, the guy who doesn't want law-abiding citizens to own handguns but allows violent criminals to feel so safe on the streets that they brazenly attack a uniformed police officer in his own driveway.
Will it make a difference that Daley personally knew this fine, brave copper? Of course not. He'll make a few meaningless media statements and perhaps attend Bailey's funeral. I certainly hope he is not allowed anywhere near a lectern on that sad day.
The City of Chicago needs to hire more cops. At least enough to replace those who are leaving in record numbers. Will that happen? No. As John Kass points out in the Tribune, "(The) mayor and his rubber-stamp council have spent all the money. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of deals went to the cronies. And now there's no money left to hire cops."
I absolutely believe that to be true. He's cheated you and the city and now, not even his cops are safe.
Be angry. Be furiously angry.
Better yet, come November, be votingly angry.
Officer Michael Bailey was 62, just weeks away from mandatory retirement.
A Chicago police officer for twenty years, he was shot in his own driveway. He was still in uniform, having returned home after a shift spent guarding Mayor Daley's home.
Think about that. He was in uniform! What does that say about the people who attacked him? What does that say about the climate of violence in that one South Side neighborhood? In fact, he's the second off-duty cop still in uniform to be killed this month.
How ironic that he was part of Mayor Richard Daley's security team. Mayor Daley, the guy who says the city's wallet is empty and he can't afford to hire more cops. Mayor Daley, the guy who doesn't want law-abiding citizens to own handguns but allows violent criminals to feel so safe on the streets that they brazenly attack a uniformed police officer in his own driveway.
Will it make a difference that Daley personally knew this fine, brave copper? Of course not. He'll make a few meaningless media statements and perhaps attend Bailey's funeral. I certainly hope he is not allowed anywhere near a lectern on that sad day.
The City of Chicago needs to hire more cops. At least enough to replace those who are leaving in record numbers. Will that happen? No. As John Kass points out in the Tribune, "(The) mayor and his rubber-stamp council have spent all the money. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of deals went to the cronies. And now there's no money left to hire cops."
I absolutely believe that to be true. He's cheated you and the city and now, not even his cops are safe.
Be angry. Be furiously angry.
Better yet, come November, be votingly angry.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Mayor Daley's Reality
Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has made it clear. He only supports the idea of cops, politicians and his well-connected friends owning handguns. He certainly doesn't want the Average Windy City Joe or Josephine to have that privilege.
I figure that following all the new requirements set forth in the Daley gun ordinance will take about five or six years, especially if I'm right and the mayor has ordered that his new bureaucracy run as slowly as a kid to get a cavity filled.
Daley purports to be against gun violence. His argument appears to be...if you keep guns away from legitimate buyers, there won't be any guns. No matter that the "illegitimate buyers", AKA the bad guys, never paid attention to his gun ban and now have no interest in the red tape of his new law. They buy their guns where they can find them. Yes a certain number of them are stolen from legitimate owners, but that number is so infinitesmal it really doesn't matter. Accidental deaths from gun accidents are also a concern but they aren't what's killing innocents on an average of two or three a night.
Daley, as usual, is all about political puffery, not protecting his citizens. I'm sure his argument seems logical to those who work in lofty offices and listen to NPR all day and have never fired a handgun (ewwe those scary things? Never! cries Buffy from her 25th floor Lincoln Park condo with doorman and security) but all it does is show me how shallow and desperate he really is.
As usual, the regular guy suffers.
I figure that following all the new requirements set forth in the Daley gun ordinance will take about five or six years, especially if I'm right and the mayor has ordered that his new bureaucracy run as slowly as a kid to get a cavity filled.
Daley purports to be against gun violence. His argument appears to be...if you keep guns away from legitimate buyers, there won't be any guns. No matter that the "illegitimate buyers", AKA the bad guys, never paid attention to his gun ban and now have no interest in the red tape of his new law. They buy their guns where they can find them. Yes a certain number of them are stolen from legitimate owners, but that number is so infinitesmal it really doesn't matter. Accidental deaths from gun accidents are also a concern but they aren't what's killing innocents on an average of two or three a night.
Daley, as usual, is all about political puffery, not protecting his citizens. I'm sure his argument seems logical to those who work in lofty offices and listen to NPR all day and have never fired a handgun (ewwe those scary things? Never! cries Buffy from her 25th floor Lincoln Park condo with doorman and security) but all it does is show me how shallow and desperate he really is.
As usual, the regular guy suffers.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
What's Good for the Goose is Lousy for Libraries
For some years now, a fellow named Bruce DuMont has been building his dream.
A political commentator and television host, he's championed the Museum of Broadcast Communications. That's a 62,000 square foot repository of all the good things that we remember from TV in Chicago through the decades. Clips of old news programs from when real journalists, not clueless, blow-dry anchors delivered the evening reports. Kid stuff like Bozo the Clown, The Ray Rayner Show and even Garfield Goose, "The King of the United States". If you grew up in Chicago during the 50's,60's and 70's, you'll know what I'm talking about.
The MBC is a wonderful idea. Problem is, lack of promised state funding halted construction four years ago. The good news for Bruce DuMont and others, however, is that Governor Quinn just cut a check for six million dollars, putting contractors back to work. He announced it at a meeting of the media elite last week. The facility is scheduled to open next year.
That's great, but . . .
At the same time, the North Suburban Library System, a consortium of over 650 academic, public, school, and special libraries in north suburban Cook, Kane, Lake and McHenry counties, is running out of money. State funds allocated by the legislature have been withheld for this year.
The NSLS has operated for twenty years with no budget increase and, in fact, last August, had its budget cut by sixteen percent. Without the state money this year, many programs will cease. Layoffs have already begun.
In a recent letter (http://www.nsls.info/articles/detail.aspx?articleID=272), Executive Director Sarah Ann Long told members, "From our recent Needs Assessment Survey, we know van delivery service is the most important service for the majority of members. We will take all necessary steps to preserve this service intact. But most other services and programs will be dramatically reduced, eliminated, or spun off." Long goes on to say she will be one of those who is leaving.
Bottom line, there's no money for libraries but, somehow the Governor found six-million for Garfield Goose.
Sure the Museum of Broadcast Communications is a fine idea and an educational one, too. But what about the basics? Like books available on inter-library loan at no cost to low-income school children? Computers for use by families that have none? After school and summer programs? Books for shut-ins and the elderly?
Let's look beyond the libraries. What about the money for the state police which, according to stories in Downstate papers, has had to scale back manpower in many districts? Districts where troopers are the primary backup for local officers when they get into a jam?
How about money for other basics like school districts? How about paying the bills owed to the vendors who have supplied goods and services to state agencies?
While the Governor and legislature kiss up to Garfield, the rest of us get goosed.
A political commentator and television host, he's championed the Museum of Broadcast Communications. That's a 62,000 square foot repository of all the good things that we remember from TV in Chicago through the decades. Clips of old news programs from when real journalists, not clueless, blow-dry anchors delivered the evening reports. Kid stuff like Bozo the Clown, The Ray Rayner Show and even Garfield Goose, "The King of the United States". If you grew up in Chicago during the 50's,60's and 70's, you'll know what I'm talking about.
The MBC is a wonderful idea. Problem is, lack of promised state funding halted construction four years ago. The good news for Bruce DuMont and others, however, is that Governor Quinn just cut a check for six million dollars, putting contractors back to work. He announced it at a meeting of the media elite last week. The facility is scheduled to open next year.
That's great, but . . .
At the same time, the North Suburban Library System, a consortium of over 650 academic, public, school, and special libraries in north suburban Cook, Kane, Lake and McHenry counties, is running out of money. State funds allocated by the legislature have been withheld for this year.
The NSLS has operated for twenty years with no budget increase and, in fact, last August, had its budget cut by sixteen percent. Without the state money this year, many programs will cease. Layoffs have already begun.
In a recent letter (http://www.nsls.info/articles/detail.aspx?articleID=272), Executive Director Sarah Ann Long told members, "From our recent Needs Assessment Survey, we know van delivery service is the most important service for the majority of members. We will take all necessary steps to preserve this service intact. But most other services and programs will be dramatically reduced, eliminated, or spun off." Long goes on to say she will be one of those who is leaving.
Bottom line, there's no money for libraries but, somehow the Governor found six-million for Garfield Goose.
Sure the Museum of Broadcast Communications is a fine idea and an educational one, too. But what about the basics? Like books available on inter-library loan at no cost to low-income school children? Computers for use by families that have none? After school and summer programs? Books for shut-ins and the elderly?
Let's look beyond the libraries. What about the money for the state police which, according to stories in Downstate papers, has had to scale back manpower in many districts? Districts where troopers are the primary backup for local officers when they get into a jam?
How about money for other basics like school districts? How about paying the bills owed to the vendors who have supplied goods and services to state agencies?
While the Governor and legislature kiss up to Garfield, the rest of us get goosed.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Unconventional Interrogation?
I'm going to take a wild guess that Joran van der Sloot, the fellow accused of beating and then strangling to death a Peruvian woman in his hotel room last week, confessed to the murder after facing some creative and unconventional interrogation by police.
Just a guess, mind you.
Van der Sloot, as you might recall, is the suspect in the disappearance of Natalie Holloway in Aruba. In fact, he was arrested twice and actually confessed several times to various scenarios involving Holloway but was released when authorities in Aruba failed to turn up enough evidence to keep him in custody.
In the most recent case, he's accused of breaking his female companion's neck after discovering she had read details about the Aruba investigation on his laptop.
Wouldn't you just hate it if your current girlfriend found out most of the world had you figured as a murderer?
I'm sure I'll hear objections but I think this is exactly the sort of case that begs for unconventional interrogation of the suspect. It's a shame the Peruvian cops didn't clear up the Holloway matter with Mr. Van der Sloot while they had his attention.
It's unfortunate, too, that U.S. law doesn't allow creative interrogation of some suspects. Particularly those who have killed a wife, or two, and then laughed in the faces of the cops, the families of the victims and the public.
With Van der Sloot and the others I'm thinking of, we're talking psychopaths of course. Predators who not only have no feelings, but delight in ripping the hearts out of those who do. For them, the mere act of murder isn't enough. Their true delight comes from our horrified reactions. They revel in the anguish they cause.
One of them even attempted to recruit a new victim right in front of us. You remember that, don't you? He proposed marriage. She accepted. Then her family and friends convinced her that her sweet patootie was actually something feral-hungry with sharp teeth and claws.
These are the sort of individuals who should face a much more unusual police interrogation. One designed to elicit specific answers to specific questions and then the promise of a guilty plea.
The sort of interrogation that requires a mop and a bucket to clean up afterward.
Just a guess, mind you.
Van der Sloot, as you might recall, is the suspect in the disappearance of Natalie Holloway in Aruba. In fact, he was arrested twice and actually confessed several times to various scenarios involving Holloway but was released when authorities in Aruba failed to turn up enough evidence to keep him in custody.
In the most recent case, he's accused of breaking his female companion's neck after discovering she had read details about the Aruba investigation on his laptop.
Wouldn't you just hate it if your current girlfriend found out most of the world had you figured as a murderer?
I'm sure I'll hear objections but I think this is exactly the sort of case that begs for unconventional interrogation of the suspect. It's a shame the Peruvian cops didn't clear up the Holloway matter with Mr. Van der Sloot while they had his attention.
It's unfortunate, too, that U.S. law doesn't allow creative interrogation of some suspects. Particularly those who have killed a wife, or two, and then laughed in the faces of the cops, the families of the victims and the public.
With Van der Sloot and the others I'm thinking of, we're talking psychopaths of course. Predators who not only have no feelings, but delight in ripping the hearts out of those who do. For them, the mere act of murder isn't enough. Their true delight comes from our horrified reactions. They revel in the anguish they cause.
One of them even attempted to recruit a new victim right in front of us. You remember that, don't you? He proposed marriage. She accepted. Then her family and friends convinced her that her sweet patootie was actually something feral-hungry with sharp teeth and claws.
These are the sort of individuals who should face a much more unusual police interrogation. One designed to elicit specific answers to specific questions and then the promise of a guilty plea.
The sort of interrogation that requires a mop and a bucket to clean up afterward.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Memorial Day 2010
Lord, why must there be war?
Do we just like to fight?
Like children in a schoolyard, do we feel the need to punch and kick each other into submission just because we’re frustrated and can do nothing else?
Or are we led to conflict by our leaders for political reasons, over territory, for power or to assure a steady flow of oil? Or are there more glorious reasons: the freedom of oppressed people suffering under the yoke of dictatorships? Are we fighting for them, Lord, or are we fighting for us, to show off our mettle and assert our strength, just because we can?
Since the beginnings of this nation, Lord, we have thrown ourselves into combat. In doing so, we have sacrificed so much. We have brought generations of young men and, now, women, home in body bags. We have condemned countless others to lives in wheelchairs or worse. We have broken the hearts of their loved ones. Spouses must learn to cope without their partners, children without one or the other of their parents, parents without their children.
And what of those who now face the daily grind of war, Lord? The combatants who must live daily, not only in fear of their own death but with the knowledge they may have to take the lives of others to survive. And there is terror at home, as deaths in battle are reported almost as an afterthought on the evening news.
Lord, as the Cross testifies, you are no stranger to suffering.
We ask you for peace.
We pray the conflicts will stop and that you will bring our troops home unscathed and whole of heart.
Until then, Lord, on this Memorial Day, please bless and hold close those who serve and those who have lost friends and loved ones in any of our armed conflicts. Please include those from law enforcement and the fire service, as well. We owe so very much to our heroes, both living and fallen. Please keep them in our hearts always.
In the name of Jesus, who sacrificed for us all, Amen.
Do we just like to fight?
Like children in a schoolyard, do we feel the need to punch and kick each other into submission just because we’re frustrated and can do nothing else?
Or are we led to conflict by our leaders for political reasons, over territory, for power or to assure a steady flow of oil? Or are there more glorious reasons: the freedom of oppressed people suffering under the yoke of dictatorships? Are we fighting for them, Lord, or are we fighting for us, to show off our mettle and assert our strength, just because we can?
Since the beginnings of this nation, Lord, we have thrown ourselves into combat. In doing so, we have sacrificed so much. We have brought generations of young men and, now, women, home in body bags. We have condemned countless others to lives in wheelchairs or worse. We have broken the hearts of their loved ones. Spouses must learn to cope without their partners, children without one or the other of their parents, parents without their children.
And what of those who now face the daily grind of war, Lord? The combatants who must live daily, not only in fear of their own death but with the knowledge they may have to take the lives of others to survive. And there is terror at home, as deaths in battle are reported almost as an afterthought on the evening news.
Lord, as the Cross testifies, you are no stranger to suffering.
We ask you for peace.
We pray the conflicts will stop and that you will bring our troops home unscathed and whole of heart.
Until then, Lord, on this Memorial Day, please bless and hold close those who serve and those who have lost friends and loved ones in any of our armed conflicts. Please include those from law enforcement and the fire service, as well. We owe so very much to our heroes, both living and fallen. Please keep them in our hearts always.
In the name of Jesus, who sacrificed for us all, Amen.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
I Agree With Sarah Palin...OMG!
During last night's appearance in Chicago, Sarah Palin took on Highland Park officials who have refused to allow the girls varsity basketball team to travel to Arizona for a tournament in December.
Hell may freeze over but I agree with her.
The school district's reasoning, explained in an email to me yesterday from Superintendent George Fornero, is thus: "We cannot commit at this time to playing at a venue where some of our students’ safety or liberty might be placed at risk because of state immigration law." Fornero denies the school district is playing politics by boycotting the Arizona tournament. "Rather," he says, "Under long standing constitutional law, all school districts are required to provide an education to all children within the District’s borders regardless of immigration status. Similarly, when our students travel, the school district is responsible, both legally and ethically, for their safety, security and liberty.
Fornero hasn't answered my question about who specifically made the decision. I find that odd. Did he wake up in the morning and kill the trip? Did the decision come from one of his assistants? The District 113 School Board? If, indeed, it was the school board, was it put to a public vote or agreed upon by a series of private phone calls so the nasty media (and voters) wouldn't have a chance to see how each member felt about the issue?
Or did the dictum come from Highland Park City Hall where, employees tell me, most significant issues are decided the old fashioned way: in back rooms by certain select individuals?
Bottom line, is it really the safety and liberty of students that school officials are worried about? Or are some Highland Park leaders taking a personal jab at the new law?
Frankly, I think Arizona is nuts. The immigration measure is a publicity stunt and will be overturned as soon as the U.S. Supreme Court reviews it.
I also think Highland Park is overreacting. The likelihood of a group of student basketball players being in any way touched by the law is minimal.
It's the fear of the backroomers running Highland Park that the city will be somehow embarrassed that has caused them to act.
Hell may freeze over but I agree with her.
The school district's reasoning, explained in an email to me yesterday from Superintendent George Fornero, is thus: "We cannot commit at this time to playing at a venue where some of our students’ safety or liberty might be placed at risk because of state immigration law." Fornero denies the school district is playing politics by boycotting the Arizona tournament. "Rather," he says, "Under long standing constitutional law, all school districts are required to provide an education to all children within the District’s borders regardless of immigration status. Similarly, when our students travel, the school district is responsible, both legally and ethically, for their safety, security and liberty.
Fornero hasn't answered my question about who specifically made the decision. I find that odd. Did he wake up in the morning and kill the trip? Did the decision come from one of his assistants? The District 113 School Board? If, indeed, it was the school board, was it put to a public vote or agreed upon by a series of private phone calls so the nasty media (and voters) wouldn't have a chance to see how each member felt about the issue?
Or did the dictum come from Highland Park City Hall where, employees tell me, most significant issues are decided the old fashioned way: in back rooms by certain select individuals?
Bottom line, is it really the safety and liberty of students that school officials are worried about? Or are some Highland Park leaders taking a personal jab at the new law?
Frankly, I think Arizona is nuts. The immigration measure is a publicity stunt and will be overturned as soon as the U.S. Supreme Court reviews it.
I also think Highland Park is overreacting. The likelihood of a group of student basketball players being in any way touched by the law is minimal.
It's the fear of the backroomers running Highland Park that the city will be somehow embarrassed that has caused them to act.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)