The Daily Detour

Tribute to our wounded warriors

Someone sent me this YouTube video of the performance at the 2009 ACM by country singer, Trace Adkins and the West Point glee club. I was blessed to see this performance when it was originally broadcasted and posted on it then about one of the many reasons why I love country music (e.g. We'd be hard-pressed to see such a genuine tribute at the typical Hollywood affair). It's certainly worth watching again. And more significantly, it's a good reminder for all of us about the ongoing sacrifices being made by our military men and women. Thank you again to those who serve... 

The reckoning of the citizenry

On his radio broadcast today, Dennis Miller was talking with a Democratic congressman about the current state of our union, in anticipation of President Obama's State of the Union address tonight. After the congressman gave his "government-is-the-answer" assessment, Miller politely thanked him for his time and suggested that they would have to agree to disagree.

After their conversation Dennis Miller went on to say that if Congress doesn't do something dramatic to turn things around there is going to be a reckoning from the American people. Or, as he put it, the American people are going to cut through them like a scythe through Slim Jims come November. That's one of the reasons why I like Miller. His creative, spur-of-the-moment analogies are typically spot on. :) 

A tribute to Haitian missionary

As I mentioned earlier this past week, my good friend, Jeanne Acheson-Munos, was killed in the earthquake in Haiti. And her husband, Jack, was seriously injured and is recovering in a Miami hospital. When I heard about her death, I wrote a brief letter to the editor to The Indianapolis Star as small tribute to Jeanne and Jack's dedication to the Haitian people.

The editor saw fit to publish the letter in today's paper. My hope, as I wrote in the letter, is that we can admire Jeanne's self-sacrificing approach to life, and hopefully, follow her example as we have opportunity.

TDD Poll: Arlen Specter, sexist or not?

It's been a while since I've put a TDD poll out to the audience, but this most recent exchange between Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Penn.) and his congressional colleague Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) begs for feedback. The two of them were being interviewed on 1210 AM's Dom Giordano Show in Philadelphia Wednesday morning. During the course of the interview, Sen. Specter got more than a bit testy to the point of telling Rep. Bachmann twice to "act like a lady."

Real Clear Politics has the audio of that portion of the radio show.

Now, here's the TDD question, "What did you think of this exchange between Specter and Bachmann?" Were his remarks out of line? Did she deserve reprimand? What's your take?

Because this exchange comes in a specifically political context, the tendency may be to allow our political beliefs to influence our assessment. Regardless of your political persuasions, I'd like to hear from any of you (especially the females in our readership) as to what you thought of this specific exchange. (In a follow-up interview, Bachmann said she believes this will be the end of Specter in Pennsylvania. What do you think?) 

UPDATE: Sean Hannity sought a comment from Arlen Specter's office, but got no response. Here is Hannity's interview with Rep. Bachmann about the exchange.

The Boston Massacre

And on Obama's 1-year anniversary no less. Ouch! and double-Ouch! The Democrats worst nightmare became a reality last night, as Republican Scott Brown soundly defeated Democrat Martha Coakley, 52-47%. He is now the Senator-elect in a Senate seat that has been in Democratic hands since 1953 (and in Ted Kennedy's hands since 1962).

The Democrat political world has been thrown off of its axis, with Dems scrambling to figure out "Who is Scott Brown?" and "How did this happen?" For as every Democrat across the country has come to realize that if the GOP can take Kennedy's seat, then every seat is in play in the mid-term election which will be coming in just over 10 months from now. No one is safe, which is why certain Democrat politicians didn't wait very long to begin trying to distance themselves from Obama's agenda in order to salvage their own political skin. In fact, as one of the media talking heads suggested, the question is, "Will it be better for them to vote for the healthcare bill, or better to vote against it?" Given the fact that Scott Brown specifically campaigned on the promise of being the 41st vote needed to halt the healthcare bill, it seems the answer is obvious.

Media pundit David Gergen acknowledged that Brown's victory effectively nailed the coffin shut on the healthcare legislation, but he also went further to suggest that it will essentially seal the fate of Obama's other iniatives as well. If so, Obama will struggle to have anything solid to show for his first year in office.

Obama has already begun to feel the backlash from the American people as his poll numbers continue to drop. And though he wants to try to shuffle the blame onto to predecessor, the American people aren't buying it anymore. On this first anniversary of his presidency, the bloom is off the rose. And the "hope and change" message is being recognized for the cotton candy it is--sweet and sugary on the outside with no real substance in the middle. American's aren't happy with the direction the country is headed and have begun figuring out ways to let their voices be heard. One of the biggest ways was to elect Brown as the new man in the blue state of Massachussetts. If 'ole Teddy could see it now... 

Healthcare hanging in the balance of the Bay State

Perhaps hidden among the rubble of the Haitian earthquake is a different kind of potentially earth-shattering upset in Massachussetts. Today is the special election between Democrat candidate Martha Coakley and Republican challenger Scott Brown. They are battling to see who will fill the seat held by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.

Massachussetts has become as blue as it comes with the Kennedy dynasty firmly established there for generations. Which is why, until just recently, the victory of Martha Coakley was all but assumed. Not so anymore. Scott Brown gave a strong performance in the final debate and was closing the gap in the polls. He has since passed Coakley in the polls, and at last count was ahead of her by 5 points, 51-46%.

Why is this particular special election so significant? Because this election is about more than just Coakley or Brown. For many, it is being seen as a kind of referendum on what is happening on the healthcare debate that has been taking place in Congress over the past few months. President Obama's signature issue was moving through the legislative process (often being pushed through at times by the Democrat majority). And if Coakley wins, then the Senate majority stands at 60 seats, which further ensures that it is filibuster-proof, and the process continues at a steady rate.

If, on the other hand, Scott Brown pulls an upset and takes the seat, the Republicans would have just enough votes to further stymie what more and more people see as a piece of bad legislation.

The sheer irony of this situation in Massachussetts today is that it was Sen. Kennedy who was most fervently spearheading the push toward universal healthcare. And it may just be "his" seat which prevents it from happening.

Update on friends in Haiti

It is with great saddness that my concerns were confirmed today. The Free Methodist World Missions department has reported the death of Jeanne Acheson-Munos, along with two other missionaries who were ministering in Haiti when the earthquake hit last Tuesday. Her husband, Jack, is still recovering in a Miami hospital, along with another FM missionary.

Jack and Jeanne have been full-time missionaries down in Haiti since 2004. They are members of my mom and dad's church here in Indy, John Wesley Free Methodist Church.

If you think of it, please pray for Jack, as I can only imagine the pain he is going through that extends far beyond his current physical condition.

(Channel 13 WTHR here in Indianapolis has reported Jeanne's death, as well. And I'm sure it will be running the news cycles here over the next day or so.)

Please continue to pursue ways to help out the recovery efforts in Haiti. There are a number of organizations who are doing great work there. And any of them would greatly appreciate any assistance you can provide. Thank you!

UPDATE: Here is an article from a Jackson, MI publication which interviewed my other very good friend, Canis Arbrouet, a native of Haiti. Canis and I traveled around the United States in the late '90s, speaking and representing the International Child Care Ministries. ICCM is a Free Methodist child sponsorship program located here in Indianapolis. Canis was a formerly sponsered child who is now living with his family in Jackson.

Finding God in Haiti's tragedy

As you know by now, Haiti was hit by a major earthquake earlier this week. Since then, President Obama has been very committed to ensuring that American forces and relief agencies are working overtime on the frontlines in providing the necessary aid to this devastated area. As the relief efforts continue, the early projections are that over 50,000 people may have lost their lives.

Many of us may know people who have been affected by this tragedy. I personally have friends who live and/or have been working down in Haiti. I've had the privilege of ministering down there in 1988 and 1998 as a part of the Free Methodist Church. During that most recent trip in '98, I worked alongside Jack and Jeanne Acheson-Munos. They have since gone back to Haiti as full-time missionaries, to work along with our other close friends, Greg and Gail Ennis (with whom we just had dinner last Friday evening).

During the most recent update I received from the Free Methodist World Missions Department, it was reported that Jack Munos was stuck under the rubble for over six hours. He has suffered multiple broken bones and has since been flown to Guantanamo Bay for surgery and on to Miami. Unfortunately, Jeanne (pictured here) has yet to be found, as are a few other FM missionaries. The situation is dire.

This is just one of the countless stories of both American citizens and Haitian nationals who have been affected by this catastrophe. And the inevitable question is, "Where is God in all of this?" Reconciling natural disasters with the notion of a loving God is difficult at best. We can blame it all on God, or simply chalk it up to the natural order of things, depending on our beliefs. As much as we may want to blame God, it is difficult to know how to deal with these kinds of unbelievable tragedies without God.

I was listening to Dennis Miller's radio program today where they were discussing these very issues. He admitted that he was struggling with this question as well. A caller from Arkansas called in and made the point that we often talk about these kinds of things as being "an act of God." He suggested that we should instead be acknowledging that this kind of tragedy is an act of nature. An act of God, on the other hand, is how we respond to this tragedy. Interestingly, the caller's perspective seemed to resonate with Dennis and he acknowledged that "it gave him a toehold" for beginning to reconcile where God is in a place like Haiti.

There will be ample time to conjecture, and many people have already begun their analysis into the meaning of this tragedy. For now, it is imperative that those of us who are inclined to pray, continue to lift up all of those affected by the earthquake. And all of us can look for ways to offer assistance in what will be a massive relief effort.

UPDATE: One of our TDD readers passed along this information about how you can help: Compassion International, United Methodist Committee on Relief, former President Bill Clinton's foundation, and this article over at FOX News provides some of the means of support. Thanks for the heads-up, Emily. Also, here is a link to the Free Methodist World Missions.

What rights do we Americans have?

More importantly, what rights should we have? Evaluating our rights was one of the findings that was revealed in a recent survey by the American Revolution Center. The analysis of the survey is lengthy, but I did want to bring some very interesting findings to your attention for feedback. The question posed to the respondents was, "Is it essential that Americans have the right to [insert name of specific right], important but not esssential, or not that important?" The following represents a summary of the answers to that question (by percentage):

1. The right to a fair trial (Essential = 84%, Important = 14%, Not important = 1%)

2. The right to practice the religion of your choice (Essential = 80%, Important = 18%, Not important = 2%)

3. The right to privacy (Essential = 76%, Important = 22%, Not important = 2%)

4. The right to speak freely about whatever you want (Essential = 70%, Important = 28%, Not important = 2%)

5. The right to practice no religion (Essential = 66%, Important = 23%, Not important = 10%)

6. The right to assemble, march, protest, or petition the government (Essential = 65%, Important = 29%, Not important = 6%)

7. The right to not have your property searched or seized (Essential = 59%, Important = 32%, Not important = 6%)

8. The right to own firearms (Essential = 45%, Important = 35%, Not important = 19%)

So, what do you think? As many people may or may not know, these are the kinds of rights guaranteed every American in the U.S. Constitution. (For the list of the Bill of Rights and the other amendments to the Constitution, click here.) Whatever one may think of them, they are ours and the reasoning behind them is worth revisiting, even in this modern age. We certainly could all use a refresher. :)

A war by any other name...

In yesterday's paper, I happened upon Charles Krauthammer's compelling article about the state of our foreign affairs, specifically related to our efforts fighting against terrorism. With the thwarted terrorist attack on the NW 253 flight on Christmas Day (thanks to the quick-thinking actions of some of the passengers), the ever-present threat of terrorists cut through the noise of the economy, healthcare, and global warming. Obama & Co may be attempting to downplay the threat of terrorism by forgoing the use of the term "War on Terror", providing a civil trial for the 9/11 mastermind, and the like. But, the threat is real. And but for the failure of the bomb to go off, combined with the vigilance of average Americans, we would be talking not about how "the system worked" (as Janet Napolitano asserted in the immediate aftermath), but instead about the Christmas Day massacre.

I've said repeatedly on this blog (including this post from back August 2007 among others) that we must remain vigilant to the clear and present danger of Islamic radicals seeking to destroy our country and way of life. But unfortunately, it is difficult to question how seriously those at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are taking the threat. In fact, FOX News is polling with this question, "Are you confident in the Obama administration's ability to battle terrorism?" It's a fair and very legitimate question, given the fact that the jihadists are not passing out party cigars that simply blow up in our face.

Some might question the accusation that Obama is not taking our national security as seriously as he should. Consider for a moment, however, how much political capital Obama has expended on issues like stimulus funding, global warming summits, and most significantly, the healthcare debate. Has he exercised half as much focus on the pressing need? One could strongly argue that he hasn't. In fact, Krauthammer summarizes the feelings of many when he writes,

The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration's response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to play down and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face.

Krauthammer goes on to make the fundamental point:

Obama may have declared the war over. Unfortunately, al-Qaeda has not...Any government can through laxity let someone slip through the cracks. But a government that refuses to admit that we are at war, indeed, refuses even to name the enemy -- jihadist is a word banished from the Obama lexicon -- turns laxity into a governing philosophy.

It is the governing philosophy of Obama & Co. that concerns me, where the reality of terrorism is concerned. If the leadership of this country continues to downplay the threats we face, the next time even concerned citizens will not be able to prevent a tragedy on American soil.