![]() |
The Weblog at The View from the Core - Saturday, December 10, 2005
|
Black Saturday The crash of '05. I fried my hard drive this afternoon. With recent backups, I can restore almost everything. My major unrecoverable loss, though, is e-mail: as far as I know now, I no longer have any of the e-mail messages I've sent or received this year. That includes any e-mail addresses I may have added to my address book this year, too. I had been thinking of taking a blogging break the last week or two of the year. Now that I'll have to be spending a lot of time recovering and restoring software and files, I'll just sign off now until 2006. God bless you, Faithful Reader, and grant you a blessed Advent, a joyous Christmas, and a happy New Year. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Sat. 12/10/05 04:32:03 PM |
Blogworthies LXXIX Because The Blog from the Core simply can't cover everything. Noteworthy entries @ speculative catholic, Power Line, Dyspeptic Mutterings, Musings of a Pertinacious Papist, reveries magazine, Wizbang, Quenta Nârwenion, neo-neocon, JunkYardBlog, RedState, Mere Comments, NewsBusters, HerbEly, Off the Record, Catholic Analysis, Irish Elk, Insight Scoop, Evolution News & Views, Right Reason, and Wittingshire. John C. Wright on becoming a Christian @ speculative catholic: John C. Wright, author of the best science fiction series of the millennium (to date) The Golden Age trilogy as well as one of the most interesting fantasy series Everness has become a Christian.... An evening to remember @ Power Line: Two or three months ago I received a call from a friend asking if I would like to attend the White House Hannukah reception. It sounded swell, but I forgot about it until I received an envelope with the White House as the return address. Thinking it was junk mail, I almost threw it out, until I noticed that my name and address on the envelope were handwritten. Inside was the invitation to the White House Hannukah reception held yesterday evening [Tue. Wed. 6].... Fundamentalism is the theological equivalent of a fever. @ Dyspeptic Mutterings: Think of it as the Body of Christ's attempt to fight off an infection. It's a sign that there's a deeper problem. You shouldn't celebrate the fever, but it's better than no temperature at all.... "White Flight" from intellectual rigor @ Musings of a Pertinacious Papist: I knew something was up when a pattern began to emerge in the non-honors sections of some of my large introductory core classes. The top students were not the rich white Anglo kids, but the immigrants in our neck of the woods, these were primariliy Romanians, Koreans, Vietnamese and Hmong. Why would the top 5% of students in these classes include immigrants struggling in a foreign language, while the majority of privileged upper-middle class American kids who had no language obstacle to contend with trolled the bottom of the mindless slough with the rest of the country's antediluvian knuckle-dragging mouth breathers? A momentous shift has occurred in our society over the last fourty years, and the chickens are coming home to roost.... Sparky Schulz @ reveries magazine: “Sparky used to say there will always be a market for innocence,” says Jeannie Schulz, widow of Charles Schulz, creator of Charlie Brown and the Peanuts comic strip gang, reports Bill Nichols in USA Today. Yes, his friends called him Sparky. Everyone else called him crazy back in 1965 when he insisted that his first-ever television special, “A Charlie Brown Christmas” would have no laugh track, that non-Hollywood children would provide the voices and that the music would consist of “a swinging score by jazz pianist Vince Guaraldi.” The show’s producers really thought Sparky was off his nut when he insisted that the show end “with a reading of the Christmas story from the Gospel of Luke by a lisping little boy named Linus.” Pulling out the big guns @ Wizbang: Robert Novak, apparently taking a break from playing politics with the CIA, is reporting on a fight on Capitol Hill between the Marine Corps and the Navy. The Navy wants to donate the last two battleships it owns, the mothballed Iowa and Wisconsin, into museums. The Corps wants them kept around for possible use. And since the Corps is a part of the Navy, they don't have much chance of winning without garnering some serious political help. This is a subject very near and dear to me. I am a huge battleship fan. I can discuss the evolution of the Dreadnaught from the USS South Carolina right through the Wisconsin, discussing how certain ships were evolutionary progressions (Utah, Pennsylvania), while others (Texas, Nevada, Washington) represented major revolutionary advances. I can do the same with the Royal Navy, which invented the modern battleship. Hell, I even have an essay mostly worked out that discusses the USS Alaska vessels, and whether they are large cruisers or battlecruisers, but I don't want to bore everyone to death. That being said, I have to sadly come down on the side that the day of the battleship is over. They pretty much peaked shortly after World War I, but it wasn't until the end of World War II that it was obvious that their time was gone.... On December 3, 1875... @ Quenta Nârwenion: Venerable John Henry Newman, C.O., wrote to one of his nephews, John Rickards Mozley. This was the final entry in a series of letters the Venerable wrote to try to answer his nephew's questions about the Church.... Amnesia: a love story @ neo-neocon: A few years ago I saw the last few minutes of a TV documentary. Those moments made a deep impression on me, although I saw so little of it I didn't really even know who or what it was about, except that it concerned a man in England who'd lost his memory in a very profound way. Then the other day, just by chance, I came across another documentary on the same subject, and finally learned his story. Clive Wearing was a British musician, conductor, and musicologist who came down with encephalitis about twenty years ago, a sudden attack that left him with only his short-term memory. Now short-term memory is a wonderful thing it allows us to remember things briefly but it's not everything. Ordinarily, after events or facts are put in our short-term memory for a few seconds, we can either delete them or store them for future reference. It's this long-term storage capacity that Clive Wearing utterly lacks.... A Date Which Will Live in Infamy @ JunkYardBlog: Michelle Malkin rounds up reaction to the 64th anniversary of Imperial Japan’s attack on the United States. December 7 always hits me from an odd angle. Serving in the US military, I lived in Japan for four years. I know people — am related to people — who were alive in both countries when the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor triggered America’s entry into World War II. My father-in-law lived across the bay from Nagasaki when he was a boy. My mother-in-law remembers American soldiers in Occupied Japan handing out candy and — this would horrify the ACLU — teaching her to sing the hymn “What A Friend We Have In Jesus.” I know, ultimately, that personally the horrific attack on sleepy Pearl took me to the place where I met my wife decades later. When we found out we were going to have a son six years ago, the doctor solemly announced the due date: December 7. Isn’t that swell.... While the Nancy Pelosi/Howard Dean/John Murtha wing of the Democrat party is fixated on contriving a US defeat in Iraq, other voices in that party counsel caution. Though I find Pelosi’s craven attempt to damage US geopolitical standing for some ephemeral electoral reason grotesque, more surprising is what those advocating caution have to offer. Nothing. Read on.... Tipping the Wheelbarrow @ Mere Comments (emphasis in original): The big news today is not news. For years, young men have been outnumbered by young women at college. Apparently, all those many initiatives spearheaded by conservatives, including conservative women, have gone for naught. Well, there weren't any such initiatives, beyond the cries of a few brave souls for instance our own contributing editor, Elizabeth Fox-Genovese. So the situation has gotten much worse, and fast. Christine Sommers is wrong: there is no war on boys. There was a war on boys. It's over. The boys lost, badly without any help from the Christian churches, and indeed with most of them, and even most "conservatives," pitching in to help their feminist opponents.... Washington Post Pattern: Good Economic News on D-1, Bad Economic News on A-1 @ NewsBusters: In Sunday’s Washington Post, Stephen Pearlstein noticed in his "Sunday Briefing" (page F-2) that "The Economy Grabs the High Ground," as the headline said. He wrote: "Defying hurricanes and inflation, rising interest rates and political gridlock, the U.S. economy demonstrated its remarkable strength and stamina last week." Despite the drama implicit in that sentence, the Post’s editors buried the news inside the paper.... Wolf-Warning Weariness, Part IV @ HerbEly: On November 23 I posted about a book suggesting that concerns about Avian flu were reminders of Aesop's fable about the boy who cried wolf. In this morning's WaPo writer Linton Weeks writes about the national tendency to panic in Fear Factory. Some extracts: .... On Jordan's Bank @ Off the Record: A Monday visit to Andrew Greeley's weekly homily site always helps me appreciate the sermon I heard the day earlier, much as dropping an engine block on your foot (in P.J. O'Rourke's image) helps you appreciate your toothache. Here's Greeley on yesterday's [Sun. Dec. 4] Gospel: .... Jesus the Radical @ Catholic Analysis: As I wrap up a course on the Synoptic Gospels, I have read and reread the three gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, along with assorted commentaries and background readings. But, in the end, it is the canonical text of these Gospels that counts. The picture I get is of how radical Jesus was and of how much we have domesticated and coopted him.... Go set the world aflame @ Irish Elk: The feast of St. Francis Xavier on Dec. 3 marked the beginning of the Jesuit Jubilee 2006. The year-long observance commemorates the 500th birthdays of original Jesuit companions Francis Xavier and Blessed Peter Faber, and the 450th anniversary of the death of Society of Jesus founder St. Ignatius Loyola.... Letter Accompanying the Vatican Instruction on Homosexuality and the Seminary @ Insight Scoop: I haven't had time to find and post this, until now. This is the much-discussed letter presenting the Vatican's Instruction to bishops. The sentence that has generated the most controversy is: "Because of the particular responsibility of those charged with the formation of future priests, they are not to be appointed as rectors or educators in seminaries". The "they" referred to are those with homosexual tendencies. The Vatican cover letter says that those with homosexual tendencies should not be appointed as rectors or educators in the seminaries. That statement is not part of the Instruction itself, but it is interesting to observe that the Congregation for Catholic Education felt compelled to include it in the letter presenting the Instruction. We'll see if that bit of "advice" gets ignored and something with more teeth on the point is eventually issued by Rome. That's the pattern call attention to a problem, suggest a common sense solution to the problem, get ignored, then issue an instruction. It remains to be seen if the last item is followed, as it often has been in the past, by failure to comply with the instruction. And if it is what will happen. In any event, here is the cover letter: .... Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker? Ignorance on Display in the New York Times @ Evolution News & Views: If you want another example of superficial analysis from the once-venerable New York Times, check out Laurie Goodstein's ill-informed effort to disparage intelligent design in today's [Sun. Dec. 4] edition. Among other things, Ms. Goodstein mangles the definition of intelligent design, misrepresents the content of the Kansas science standards, and displays her ignorance of evangelical Christian higher education and the academic supporters of ID. Some background: Last Thursday Ms. Goodstein contacted Discovery Institute because she wanted to interview me for a story. Her deadline was later the same day, so she contacted Discovery right before she planned to file the story. When I called her, it was clear she already had written most of her story. All she was looking for was window-dressing.... Two Concepts of Obligation @ Right Reason (brackets in original): At some point clearly by the time of Franklin Roosevelt, but perhaps somewhat earlier the traditional philosophical distinction between perfect and imperfect obligations began to break down. The breakdown had serious economic and political consequences. The obligation to help others in need was the paradigm of an imperfect obligation, an obligation that was general and granted no rights to anyone else. To fail to help a person in need might be wrong, but it was not unjust or so Cicero, Aquinas, and Kant all thought. No one was entitled to help, and the use of force through government taxation, for example, for purposes of redistribution was thought to be illegitimate, a confusion of two rather different kinds of obligation. Charity was an individual virtue and a private matter, not something to be conducted with the coercive power of government. Utilitarianism, I think, was crucial to the development of the alternative that placed distributional questions in government hands. Marx, of course, insisted that people have a right to have their needs met. That right would have to correspond to a perfect obligation on the part of others to contribute according to their abilities to meeting those needs. By the time of the New Deal, such a view was widespread. The traditionalist might well agree with Roosevelt that “[no one should go] unfed, unclothed, or unsheltered,” but resist his conclusion that "aid must be extended by governments, not as a matter of charity but as a matter of social duty." Marxism, socialism, and liberalism, however, were happy to draw the inference, and tended to think of imperfect obligations that did not correspond to any perfect obligations or entitlements as incoherent, toothless, or worse. But is the inference legitimate?... Scenes from Sunday @ Wittingshire: Our congregation isn't huge 250 or so but it's a tight squeeze to fit everyone in for one service, so we have two. Our family goes to the earlier worship time, but this morning the kids and I stayed on for part of the later service because all the children's classes were to stand up in front of the congregation and recite the beatitudes and various other scriptures they've been memorizing.... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Sat. 12/10/05 10:54:02 AM |
"The Panic Over Iraq" Some articles are so significant, they shouldn't be risked getting lost in the crowds. For such, today sees the inauguration of a new category here at The Blog from the Core: More Than Readworthy. Though I may add already existing entries as time goes by, here is the new category's first entry: Norman Podhoretz's article at Commentary (brackets in original): Like, I am sure, many other believers in what this country has been trying to do in the Middle East and particularly in Iraq, I have found my thoughts returning in the past year to something that Tom Paine, writing at an especially dark moment of the American Revolution, said about such times. They are, he memorably wrote, “the times that try men’s souls,” the times in which “the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot” become so disheartened that they “shrink from the service of [their] country.” .... The similarities to our situation today are uncanny. We, too, are in the midst of a rapidly spreading panic. We, too, have our sunshine patriots and summer soldiers, in the form of people who initially supported the invasion of Iraq — and the Bush Doctrine from which it followed — but who are now abandoning what they have decided is a sinking ship. And we, too, are seeing formerly disguised opponents of the war coming more and more out into the open, and in ever greater numbers. Yet in spite of these similarities, there is also a very curious difference between the American panic of 1776-7 and the American panic of 2005-6. To put it in the simplest and starkest terms: in that early stage of the Revolutionary War, there was sound reason to fear that the British would succeed in routing Washington’s forces. In Iraq today, however, and in the Middle East as a whole, a successful outcome is staring us in the face. Clearly, then, the panic over Iraq — which expresses itself in increasingly frenzied calls for the withdrawal of our forces — cannot have been caused by the prospect of defeat. On the contrary, my twofold guess is that the real fear behind it is not that we are losing but that we are winning, and that what has catalyzed this fear into a genuine panic is the realization that the chances of pulling off the proverbial feat of snatching an American defeat from the jaws of victory are rapidly running out.... Obviously, then, the reporters and their editors in the mainstream media have been working overtime to show how badly things have been going for us in Iraq. Meanwhile, the op-ed pundits, the academic theorists, and the armchair generals have chimed in with analyses blaming it all on the incompetence of the President and his appointees. By now, the proposition that the aftermath of the invasion has been marked by one disastrous blunder after another is accepted without question or qualification by just about everyone: open opponents of the Bush Doctrine eager to prove that they were right to denounce the invasion; Democrats whose main objective is to discredit the Bush administration; and erstwhile supporters who have lost heart and are looking for a way to justify their desertion. But the charge of incompetence has also been hurled by strong supporters of the Bush Doctrine in general and of the invasion of Iraq in particular, whose purpose is to prod the people running the operation into doing a better job. The most authoritative such supporter, Eliot A. Cohen of Johns Hopkins, has expressed a desire — barely controlled — to slap the highly educated fool who, having no soldier friends or family, once explained to me that mistakes happen in all wars, and that the casualties are not really all that high, and that I really shouldn’t get exercised about them. Now, this person may well have deserved a slap for being presumptuous toward a distinguished military historian, or for insensitivity in downplaying casualties when speaking to the father of an infantry officer on his way to Iraq. But at the risk of exposing myself as another highly educated fool, I must confess that I too think we need to be reminded that mistakes happen in all wars, and that the casualties in this one are very low by any historical standard. Before measuring Iraq in these two respects, I want to look more closely at some of the actions taken by the Bush administration that are universally accepted as mistakes, and to begin by pointing out that the main one is based on an outright falsification of the facts. This is the accusation that no thought was given to what would happen once we got to Baghdad and no plans were therefore made for dealing with the aftermath of the combat phase. Yet the plain truth is that much thought was given to, and many plans were made for dealing with, horrors that everyone expected to happen and then, mercifully, did not. Among these were: house-to-house fighting to take Baghdad; the flight of a million or more refugees; the setting of the oil fields afire; and the outbreak of a major civil war. As for the insurgency, even if its dimensions had accurately been foreseen, it would still have been impossible to eliminate it in short order. To cite Eliot Cohen himself: If the insurgencies in Northern Ireland, Israel/Palestine, Sri Lanka, and Kashmir continue, what reason do we have to expect this one to end so soon? A related group of alleged “mistakes” turn out on closer inspection to be judgment calls, concerning which it is possible for reasonable men to differ. The most widely circulated of these — especially among supporters of the war on the Right — is that there were too few American “boots on the ground” to mount an effective campaign against the insurgency. Perhaps. And yet the key factor in fighting a terrorist insurgency is not the number of troops deployed against it but rather the amount and quality of the intelligence that can be obtained from infiltrating its ranks and from questioning prisoners (a task made all the more difficult for us by the campaign here at home to define torture down to the point where it would become illegal to subject even a captured terrorist to generally accepted methods of interrogation).... Mark Twain once famously said that reports of his death were greatly exaggerated. So it was, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, with the post-Vietnam syndrome. During those early weeks, a number of commentators were quick to proclaim the birth of an entirely new era in American history. What December 7, 1941 had done to the isolationism of old, they announced, September 11, 2001 had done to the Vietnam syndrome. Politically speaking, it was dead, and the fallout from the Vietnam war — namely, the hostility to America and especially to American military power — would follow it into the grave. As is evident from the coverage of Iraq in the mainstream media, such pronouncements were more than a little premature: the Vietnam syndrome is still alive and well. But equally apparent is that the reporters and editors to whom it is a veritable religion understand very clearly that success in Iraq could deal the Vietnam syndrome a mortal blow. Little wonder, then, that they have so resolutely tried to ignore any and all signs of progress.... Like the mainstream media and the theorists in the academy and the think tanks, the Democratic party — fearing that it might be frozen out of power for a very long time to come — is also in a panic over the signs that George W. Bush’s new approach to the greater Middle East is on the verge of passing the test of Iraq. Hence the veritable hysteria with which the Democrats have recently tried to delegitimize the war: first by claiming (three years after the fact!) that it had begun with a lie, and then by declaring that it was ending in a defeat. Leaning heavily on the turn in public opinion largely brought about by reports in the mainstream media and the lucubrations of the theorists, the Democrats now joined in by clamoring openly for a withdrawal of American forces from Iraq. A goodly number of these Democrats (Howard Dean and Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, to name only two) are the “Tories” of today, in the sense of having from the very beginning stood openly and unambiguously against the revolution in foreign policy represented by the Bush Doctrine and now being put to the test in Iraq. But a much larger number of Democrats fit more smoothly into Tom Paine’s category of “disguised” Tories. These are the Congressmen and Senators who in their heart of hearts were against the resolution authorizing the President to use force against Saddam Hussein, but who — given the state of public opinion at the time — feared being punished at the polls unless they voted for it. Now, however, with public opinion moving in the other direction, they have been emboldened to “show their heads.” Finally, we have a certain number of Democrats who correspond to the “the summer soldiers and the sunshine patriots” of the American Revolution. One of them is Congressman John Murtha, who backed the invasion of Iraq because (to give him the benefit of the doubt) he really thought it was the right thing to do, but who has now bought entirely into the view that all is lost and that the only sensible course is to turn tail: .... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Sat. 12/10/05 10:37:53 AM |
"In Denial" By Pat Santy at Dr. Sanity (italics in original): Today we’re going to visit the Wonderful World of Denial. An appreciation of this particular psychological defense mechanism might be extremely helpful in trying to understand some of the political insanity prevalent in the world today. Denial can be thought of as a complex psychological process where there may be some conscious knowledge or awareness of events in the world, but somehow one fails to feel their emotional impact or see their logical consequences. Denial is an attempt to reject unacceptable feelings, needs, thoughts, wishes or even a painful external reality that alters the perception of ourselves. This psychological defense mechanism protects us temporarily from: .... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Sat. 12/10/05 10:33:33 AM |
Readworthies XXVIII A handful of interesting, informative, and insightful articles. News, editorials, columns, essays, et al. Noble Cause: Brief Wars Rarely Produce Lasting Results. Long Wars Often Do. by William J. Stuntz @ The New Republic Online (LRR): In 1861 Abraham Lincoln led what was left of his country to war to restore "the Union as it was," to use the popular phrase of the time. Free navigation of the Mississippi River, the right to collect customs duties in Southern ports, the status of a pair of coastal forts in South Carolina and Florida these were the issues over which young American men got down to the business of killing one another that sad summer. It was all a pipe dream. "The Union as it was" was gone, forever. Events proved William Tecumseh Sherman the prophet of that war right, and everyone else wrong: An ocean of blood would be required to reunite the United States, and once that blood was spilled, the country over which James Buchanan had presided was as dead as the soldiers whose corpses littered the battlefields of Shiloh and Gettysburg, Antietam and Cold Harbor.... Think Again: Minority Advantage by Jonathan Rosenblum @ Jerusalem Post via Jewish Media Resources (ht): .... [Judge Samuel] Alito's biography (Princeton, Yale Law) and that of the recently confirmed Chief Justice John Roberts (Harvard College, Harvard Law) led me to reflect on the very different socialization of conservatives and liberals on elite campuses. The former spend their entire educational careers as a small minority surrounded by people whose political views and often their social mores differ sharply from their own. Because of their minority status it is far more difficult for conservative students to entertain the illusion that all smart people think like them. They are exposed to many obviously bright young men and women whose opinions on almost every issue vary radically from their own.... College should be a place of higher learning by Rick Esenberg @ Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (ht): I don't recall dorm life as being for the faint of heart. Apart from hall surfing, contact highs and "the walk of shame" following an ill-advised romantic encounter, living in a dormitory requires young people to learn to put up with beliefs and behavior that may make them uncomfortable. Universities often view this as a good thing. Living among those with different values, they claim, is a "broadening" experience. Being offended can actually be educational. But not all forms of offense are equally enlightening. Exposure to vulgarity, casual sex and music reminiscent of the slaughter of cats presumably opens minds and expands perspectives. On the other hand, being forced to witness a group of students praying is more than anyone should have to put up with.... Earmarks by Rich Galen @ Mullings (ht):
Imagine MNF Being Covered Like Iraq by Jon Ham @ Carolina Journal (ht): Watching Monday Night Football the other night, it occurred to me that if one imagined the mainstream media covering that game the way they cover the war in Iraq (or the economy), the absurdity of their reporting would be plain for all to see.... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Sat. 12/10/05 10:25:20 AM |
A Couple of Comments On Defeatocrats and Scott Adams & God. I commented at a couple of other blogs lately. First, at Irish Pennants (italics in original): Today it finally dawned on me: They want out because they now recognize we will soon achieve victory! That dawned on me a couple of weeks ago, too. It also seems to me now that some Democrats, at least, are starting to employ a strategy which will paint the outcome as a defeat, no matter what the outcome will be. Never mind that Saddam has been overthrown, captured, and imprisoned; never mind that several successful elections will have been held; never mind that a fairly representative parliament will be sitting; never mind that, relatively speaking, Iraq will have a fairly stable society and a fairly democratic government: it was Bush's War, so we must have lost it. Also at Lex Communis (emphasis in original): From that link: "If people believed in God," he points out, "they would live every minute of their lives in support of that belief. Rich people would give their wealth to the needy. Everyone would be frantic to determine which religion was the true one. No one could be comfortable in the thought that they might have picked the wrong religion and blundered into eternal damnation, or bad reincarnation, or some other unthinkable consequence. People would dedicate their lives to converting others to their religions." He adds: "If you believe a truck is coming toward you, you will jump out of the way. That is belief in the reality of the truck. If you tell people you fear the truck but do nothing to get out of the way, that is not belief in the truck." Now, do you believe in God? It seems to me that, as portrayed, the analogy is faulty. It uses the word "belief" in two ways: one is the way in which we usually apply the word to believing in God; the other way is that in which we would more typically use the word "know" rather than "believe". One's belief that a truck is coming towards one is quite different [from] one's belief that God exists, creates, loves, etc. That is why it would be very rare, and indeed strange, to hear of one's actions based on the "belief" that a truck is coming towards one. I think it would be more usual to encounter a situation like, "I saw the truck was going to hit me..." or "I knew the truck was coming right at me..." or even "I thought the truck was going to hit me." As I understand things, no "belief" is involved in those cases: what is involved is knowledge. (To further illustrate the possibility of confusion of thought concerning the concept of belief, I originally began my remarks, "I believe the analogy is faulty....") :-) Also, positing what people would do if they actually believed something is a remarkably weak assertion and depends, I think, to a great extent on the person's own imagination of what he would, or would not, do in consequence of such beliefs. Surely, the whole book is actually better than this bit? And why would such a poor example be excerpted by the reviewer? Lane Core Jr. CIW P Sat. 12/10/05 08:13:34 AM |
What Has Become of Vatican II? As far as I can tell, I'm the only blogger on the Earth who remembered Vatican II's 40th anniversary. (Jamie came close, sort of, and Amy gave it a sideways glance.) What's up with that? Lane Core Jr. CIW P Sat. 12/10/05 08:00:20 AM |
The Blog from the Core © 2002-2008 E. L. Core. All rights reserved. |
Previous | Week | Next |