Here we go

I just finished the last can of Diet Pepsi that was in the fridge.  If all goes according to plan, those precious last sips were the last I will have of any soda until Easter.  Mainly, I am trying to avoid caffeine, but I think just giving up soda with caffeine defeats the purpose.  Thus, no soda at all until after Easter.

40 days away.

Ugh.

For the last few decades, when it has come time to observe the Catholic rite of giving up something for Lent, I have given up giving things up.  Accordingly, I have been very, very successful, and just a tad silly about the whole thing.  I may be the only person who ever lived with negative will power, so I knew that to try to give up something was nonsense.  I would last a minute, maybe.

Ah, but this year is different.  This year I happen to be getting married and as fate has allowed it will be to another Catholic.  In true fashion, I feel the need to prove to myself that I can go without something of significance for a while.  I'd feel somewhat of a hypocrite if I did not observe the demands of the faith and then get married in it.

You may find it silly that I would equate soda with the phrase "something of significance."  Obviously, you know nothing of me.

I drink a lot of it, mostly diet, so I lead myself to believe that I am not ingesting needless calories.  Needless chemicals, yes, but at least I'm not contributing to my weight.  Or am I?  There are several trains of thought here, as I have read items that say that diet soda does not keep you from gaining weight, and those that say that while it does not lead to weight gain, it may lead to craving food more so than normal.

Well, I'm five foot nine, and I weigh about 225.  Houston, we have a problem.

If all goes as planned, for the next forty days whenever I would normally reach for a soda I will reach for a water bottle instead.  I will still have the occasional glass of coffee or tea, as I will not be able to function with absolutely no caffeine over Lent.  I may be bold, but I am not insane.

Of course, should I be successful at this and avoid soda for Lent, it would seem foolish to fall back into old habits once Easter arrives.  There's no reason why I can't adjust to this.  I've done it before.  A few years ago I gave up soda for almost two months, just for the heck of it, and dropped about fifteen pounds during that time, concentrating on other aspects of my health as well.

That's what I hope to accomplish here.

I'm not getting any younger.  I may only be 37 but there are days where I feel twice that age.  My flexibility is terrible, and my back hurts, probably from the extra weight that hangs off the front of me.  My kids haven't been born yet.  At the rate I am going, I will need a walker to walk with them when they start moving.

Mentally I feel about 21.  Funny, but it's been that way for about seventeen years.

I want to be around for a while.  My life has changed so much in the last few years, with so many good things happening.  Some are the result of choice and hard work, others are just the result of fate. 

I'm lucky that lately, when I make up my mind to do something, I have been able to do it.  So why not this?

Still, I may be a pain to be around for a while.  I know I tend to write better things when I am irritable, but if you see me on the street, you might want to make sure you are walking on the other side.

Especially if you happen to have a Big Gulp on you.

Taking it to the bank

Last week, the cover story of Time magazine featured the 25 most influential evangelicals in America.  I always enjoy reading articles of this type, succinct information packaged into short intervals.  It was a fascinating read.

To Time's credit, they avoided the people who have used religion to create media and corporate empires.  Men like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell do not make the list.  They are more entrepreneurs than evangelists.

The list is predominantly white, and it is prominently Republican.

Go figure.

For some reason, Republicans seem to have cornered the market on God.  It's nothing but a strategy and as soon as the leader of their party is someone other than George W. Bush it will be difficult for them to keep this advantage.  The Democrats know this, and from now until the 2008 election, we can forget about the separation of Church and State.  Any Democrat with serious aspirations of high elected office will make sure to have many photo ops going in and out of their place of worship.

As we have become a nation divided into red states and blue states it strikes me that the only difference between the two is what we allow our politicians to make us believe.  The red among us are convinced that they are morally superior to the blue, because they inject religion into the issues of abortion, stem cell research, and even war.  I feel a chill in my spine every time I hear someone say that "God has chosen George W. Bush to lead the nation" at a time when he has decided to take us into war.

I wonder if the people who say this truly understand the First of the Ten Commandments.  At times, I believe that underneath everything, the President is really a Golden Calf.

If John Kerry had been elected President, do you think he would have told the nation that God had chose him to be the one to defeat George W. Bush?

As someone who is a Democrat and believes in God, I keep my inner feelings in regards to spirituality to myself.  I believe that religion is an intensely personal issue, and I don't feel it is my place to tell others how they should live their lives based upon what I believe.  As such, it drives me to the brink of insanity how the Republicans have allowed themselves to convince a great deal of the country that they are truly the party of God.

Somewhere in the Bible it says "Judge not, lest ye be judged."  If it were up to me, I'd have this replace the national motto "E pluribus unim."

All we do is judge.  In politics, we turn every issue into a litmus test for morality.  Red is better than blue, or blue better than red, when in reality all should be black and white.

The simplest colors there are.

Where am I going with this?  I'm not really sure.  I started this discussion because I was fascinated by a list of people who have been deemed to have "influence" in this country based upon their religious conviction.  I know none of these 25 people, yet after reading this piece, I find myself judging them.  I think they are all shrewd, intelligent people who have realized that religion is a big business in this country.

If you don't think so, do a little extra research on any of the 25 mentioned in the article, as I did.  You will find that they all have a few things in common.  One of them is that they have a lot of money.

Money breeds influence.  Influence bleeds into power.  Power spills into politics, because who ever has the most power, has the most control.

It's a transitive equation: money equals control.

Any of these 25 sees themselves as able to influential national opinions on a bevy of issues.  That they do so does not make them corrupt, nor does it make them evil.

But does it make them guilty, even by association?

Why is it that most of the highly influential evangelicals seem to be in the hip pocket of the GOP?  And why is it that the Democrats are ripping their collective scalp out trying to figure out what they have to do to get them leaning their way?

The answer really has nothing to do with God or even morality.

It's the money, pure and simple, and the influence, the control, and, most importantly, the votes that it brings.

You can read the list of the 25 most influential evangelicals and judge for yourself which are "red" and which are "blue."

But you'll miss the point.  The only color that matters, and the only color you should see, is green.

Cell phones and planes

The Onion has some opinions on the fact that you might be able to use your cell phone on an airplane soon.

I especially enjoyed Carla and Toby's thoughts.

(I'm surprised that the folks at this paper do not take advantage of the near symmetry of their title and the word "opinion" and come up with something like the opinonion page...but then no one asked me.) 

Quick post-SB thoughts

Not only did I correctly pick the Patriots winning by three, I almost nailed the exact final score.  I was pulling for the Eagles to get a break late, kick the tying field goal to send the game into OT, and then watch Adam Vinateri win a Super Bowl for the third time with a kick on the game's last play.  Alas, 'twas not meant to be.  And as far as for picking the Patriots by 3, I'd love to tell you that I have all these formulas and such, and that it took me hours of careful analysis to come up with that margin, but I'd be lying.  New England won each of their previous two Super Bowls by three.  I just guessed that they could do it again.

History will judge the 39th Super Bowl as mediocre, and I have a feeling that will suit the Patriots just fine, thank you.  It's refreshing to see a professional sports team place its emphasis on all facets of the team.  There's normally very little showboating from New England, though for some reason yesterday they decided that whenever someone scored they should flap their wings like an Eagle.  For the most part, the team keeps its collective mouth shut.  Winning tends to make a louder statement than any spoken word.

I do wonder what the circumstances have to be for Andy Reid (Philly's coach) to employ a hurry-up offense.  When your team is down by two scores with three minutes left in the game, you should never be in a huddle.  My exact final score completion may have come to fruition if the Eagles' offense had a sense of urgency.  Their lack of time management skills late in the game would have driven me absolutely insane if I were a Philly fan.

Let's hope that Terrell Owens gets the credit he deserves for playing yesterday.  Actually, he did more than play, he was a major factor in how Philly was able to keep the game close.  This is a guy who had major surgery a little more than six weeks ago for a broken leg.  It's amazing not only that he was able to play, but that he was able to play at his normal level of excellency.  I doubted the man, not because of who he is, but because I saw his injury and thought that there was no way anyone could come back in that time frame.  Owens has a big mouth and sometimes does things on the field that are unnecessary, but the guy is also a big-time warrior.  It's ridiculous that people were calling him out leading up to the game for being selfish because he wanted to play.  If he did not play yesterday, the score of that game would have been 24-7, or maybe even 24-0.  Owens belongs on the short list of guys who have played beyond expectation when injured on the main stage.  Why this isn't getting more positive publicity astounds me.

Let New England bask in the glory of their dynasty until August.  They deserve it.  I'm sure they will be favored again next year, but they will have plenty of competition.  Looking for a darkhorse to win it all next year?  You don't have to go very far from the location of last night's game.  The Jacksonville Jaguars are loaded, especially on defense, and could well improve on their 9-7 record from this past year.

So we say adios to football, which means baseball is right around the corner.  As for the promise of warmer weather, I'll wait just a bit until I fall for that.  It's about as miserable as can be here in Chicago today.

Quick prediction

New England 27  Philadelphia 24

I really would like to see the Eagles win.  I like Donovan McNabb, he's a native Chicagoan and he has certainly paid his dues.  The Patriots have won two of the last three years, so why not let someone else have a turn?

But my biggest reason for wanting Philly to win is this: Boston has had enough to celebrate lately-the already mentioned two NFL titles, plus the Red Sox winning the World Series this year.  With the way the Sox came back from that 3-0 deficit against the Yankees in the ALCS, it's as if they won twice. 

I know Boston has gone through some long stretches with lousy sports teams, and I'm happy that they have had some recent success, but life is enjoyed best when enjoyed in moderation.

That being said, I can't not pick New England.  They are clearly the better team.  The wallet says go with the Patriots.  The heart says the Eagles.

A word from our sponsor

Before I tackle this week's Saturday Six I would like to clarify something for those of you in ZIP CODE 91016 regarding question #2 from two weeks ago.  If you recall, the key word used was "closest."  Mr. Dictionary gives multiple meanings for the word that pertain to its use in this question.  That's why I called it "ambiguous."  Certainly, we here in the Wood Party would never intentionally demean the bonds of friendship formed long ago when it was OK for two men to snuggle at a picnic whilst enjoying a cheese danish.  It was simply one of a potential many answers that could have been given.

Thank you.  And now for something completely different:  

 

1. What is your favorite restaurant to visit for breakfast and what do you order?  (Preparing long-winded answer): When I was in high school a group of my friends and I decided that one day we would drive to Canada for the sole reason of having breakfast.  As soon as we finished eating, we would get in the car and drive back home.  It never happened, but in the fall of 2003 my fiancee and I spent a few days in Montreal.  There's a restaurant in the old Montreal Forum (the name escapes me-yeah, I know, go figure) where we ate three times, and each time I had the chicken and eggs platter, and it was heavenly.  Breakfast in Canada is everything it is cracked up to be.  Thinking about it has me digging out my passport.

2. Do you have any unique ability like those who appear on David Letterman's "Stupid Human Tricks?"  If so, how did you learn you had this talent?  Not anymore.  When I was a kid I was the self-proclaimed World Champion of leaning back and balancing my chair on just two legs, but I'm sure my center of gravity has shifted past championship proportions now.  Damn.
 
3. There are plenty of sites on the internet for pen pals; some of them are specifically designed for communicating with people in prison.  Have you ever or would youbegin corresponding with a stranger who was in prison?  I seriously doubt it, but never say never.  I would not correspond with anyone who was in prison for committing a violent crime.
 
4. Name two questions you have always wanted to ask a pair of identical twins.  The urge has never hit me, so if these are lame, it's because I just thought of them.  I'd ask if there was any pushing and shoving in the womb to determine who was born first,  and if they've ever had breakfast in Canada. 
 
5. If you looked back at your high school yearbook photos, what is more embarrassing?  Your hair, your clothes, your glasses, or your complexion?  Never wore glasses, my complexion was only noticeable in my freshman pic, and my hair was an issue in maybe two.  By far the worst thing about any of my high school pics are the facial expressions.  I look really, really serious, like I was sitting on a cactus or something.  I've never been one who is able to smile (or look somewhat relaxed) when taking pictures.

6. If you had to change the color of one of the following, which would you change and why:  the walls in your living room, your car, or your eyes.  The car is black, no problem there.  Eyes are blue, no worries.  Living room is white, and that is what I would change, if I were "allowed" to and also about fifteen feet tall.

I must still be hallucinating

How else could I explain that I just saw an actual video on MTV?