I've been thinking about this quote for a few days now...
It's extraordinary to me that the United States can find $700 billion to save Wall Street and the entire G8 can't find $25 billion dollars to save 25,000 children who die every day from preventable diseases. [Bono, rock star and anti-poverty activist.]
I've watched just about every clip I can from this interview and honestly I've come away with the same reaction every time...
Here's the transcript of the question and Palin's answer:
COURIC: Why isn’t it better, Governor Palin, to spend
$700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with
health care, housing, gas and groceries? Allow them to spend more, and
put more money into the economy, instead of helping these big financial
institutions that played a role in creating this mess?
PALIN: That’s why I say I, like every American I’m speaking
with, we're ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it
is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout
does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that
is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it’s got to be
about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on
the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining
in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for
Americans, and trade — we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as,
uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the
trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All
of those things under the umbrella of job creation.
The bailout helps those concerned with health care? "So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining
in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for
Okay, so this weekend was a long one with seven, yes seven, games total [three on Saturday, four on Sunday. Here's the highlights [or perhaps not the highlights...]
Lavender Lasers [Madi] - One thing can be said for this team... consistency. After two game this weekend, they are still looking for their first win of the season after losing both games by the same score, 5-0. So if you're counting at home, the Lavender Lasers have been outscored in their four games by a total of 18-1. I missed Madi's game today due to Josh's baseball game, so when I asked her about the game, she answered with all the determination she could muster at eight and said, "We sucked Dad." Hopefully they can turn it around next weekend... [Overall Record: 0-4]
Pink Chaos [Mikayla] - Kayla's team continued their winning streak easily winning, 5-0. [Our family has something with the number 5...] Mikayla has turned into quite the good defender, which is something new for Kayla. [The post-game snack has always been her favorite part of the game.] She is hustling after the ball and making the big kicks when she needs to. After losing their first game, they are on a modest little three game winning streak. [Overall Record: 3-1]
Chix With Kix [Megan] - Megan's team had two games this weekend, one Saturday and one today. They pulled out their first win yesterday, coming from behind to win 2-1. Today, a much different story [and a different team]... they lost 4-1. Megan had her first go at being a forward today and almost scored twice, missing one shot by only a foot. This is a HUGE deal for Megan, who is not the fastest, most aggressive player out there. But today was a different story. She was all over the place, fighting for balls and mixing it up in general. [Overall Record: 1-2-1]
Capo Cats Baseball [Josh] - The Cats took on the Irvine Rox in a double header today. Josh was our starting pitcher for the first game and was the recipient of a few costly errors in his two innings of work. He gave up two runs [both unearned] on one hit. He walked one and struck out three. In the first game we needed to come from behind with the game ending in a tie, 6-6, due to time constraints. We had our chances, but just could not capitalize with the timely hit when we needed it. Josh went 0-4 at the plate. The second game was much better. It was scoreless going into the bottom of the sixth when we put up four runs. They came back in the top of the seventh with seven runs of their own. This set the stage for our comeback in the bottom of the seventh when Josh drove in two runs, one being the tying run, with a single. A few batters later we won the game with a walk-off single, 8-7. Josh went 2-4 with two singles, one run scored and two runs batted in for our second game. [Overall Record: 2-1-1]
Perhaps you've seen this video, which has been floating around for a few weeks in the blog world. Just in case you haven't... allow me to be the one to enlighten you. Enjoy.
[WARNING: The side effects of watching the following video include, but are not limited to nausea, vomiting, paralysis, and having this "catchy" little tune bore a hole in your brain. You have been forewarned.]
Greg Boyd has a fascinating post on the real issue at the heart of open theism, namely the nature of the future, as opposed to the denial of God's perfect knowledge. Here's how he opens the post:
Sometimes little mistakes have big consequences. I think I may have
uncovered one such mistake that took place two and a half millennia ago
that continues to adversely affect people’s thinking about
First a little background. As I’m sure most of my
bloggers know, open theism (which I embrace) holds that, because agents
are free, the future includes possibilities (what agents may and may not
choose to do). Since God’s knowledge is perfect, open theists hold that
God knows the future partly as a realm of possibilities. This view
contrasts with classical theism that has usually held that God knows
the future exclusively as a domain of settled facts. There are no
“maybes” for God.
The debate is not about the scope and
perfection of Gods’ knowledge, for both open theists and classical
theists affirm God’s omniscience. God always knows everything. The
debate, rather, is about the content of the reality God perfectly
knows. It comes down to the question of whether or not possibilities
This isn’t a difficult concept to grasp, which is why
for years I’ve been puzzled as to why many defenders of the classical
theism continue to spin the debate with open theists as a disagreement
over the perfection of God’s knowledge. For example, they publish books
with titles like How Much Does God Know? (Steven Roy) and What Does God Know and When Does He Know It? (Millard Erickson). They of course know open theists believe God always knows everything, so why do they continue to argue as if we don’t?
of the explanation, of course, may be simple propaganda. Yet I’ve
become convinced that something deeper than this is going on. My sense
is that, while spinning the debate as about God’s knowledge rather than
the nature of reality certainly is advantageous for the purpose of
propaganda, the critics who argue this way also seem to sincerely
believe what they’re saying. How can this be?
The rest of the post is quite thought provoking. Check it out here.