davintosh

The big news today is that someone in Winner, SD, won the PowerBall Lottery, to the tune of $232.1 Million. Wow. That’s a pile o’money. When I heard about this on the radio this morning the announcer also mentioned something about the SD Lottery Commission having posted info about where the money they took in has been spent, so I decided to have a look.

According to the “Where The Money Goes” page on the SD Lottery website, since the Lottery was first instituted in 1987, the state has netted $1.7 billion (with a ‘B”) from lottery revenues. That’s $1.7 billion that has gone into worthy programs like Property Tax Reduction ($1.3 billion) and Capital Construction ($30 million), and another $389 million in the General Fund. But that $1.7 billion in revenue comprises only 26.2% of the total of all that has been spent on the lottery; since 1987, nearly $6.6 billion has been spent by people trying to earn a quick buck.

Of that $6.6 billion, 55.4% (about $3.6 billion) has gone back out in prizes, and 5.5% ($360 million) in commission payments to retailers, which is money that has stayed in the economy, doing the work that money should do in a thriving economy. So to net that $1.7 billion, a total of about $2.5 billion was siphoned away from the economy. That’s basically an additional tax of about $162 a year for every resident of the state of South Dakota. But it’s not an efficient method of taxing, because more than a third of the money that went to the state (around $850 million) went into running the SD Lottery system. I’d say that’s a lot of overhead for tax money. And that’s just the direct cost; assessing the full societal cost for the problems that state-sponsored gambling bring on and compound is difficult, but it’s surely much, much more than that.

The SD Lottery website boasts that, “The Lottery is a totally self-funded agency. No tax dollars are used for its operation.” which is more than a bit deceiving. Because the lottery is funded through it’s own sales, and people are not required to put money into the lottery, it’s technically not a tax. But I remain unconvinced that money spent on the lottery is not a tax, and I’m not alone. Back in 1732 Henry Fielding wrote the following:

A Lottery is a Taxation,
Upon all the Fools in Creation;
And Heav’n be prais’d,
It is easily rais’d,
Credulity’s always in Fashion;
For, Folly’s a Fund,
Will never lose Ground;
While Fools are so rife in the Nation.

Since the lottery is essentially an elective tax, some taxpayers (Fielding’s fools) are hit harder than others. Our family, for example, hasn’t put one red cent into the lottery, which means that since 1987 someone else has plugged more than $17,000 into the SD Lottery system on our behalf. There are a lot of other people who have avoided the lottery, which means others have ponied up a pile of money to make up the difference; much more than their $162 a year. And the problem is the people who tend to elect to pay this tax are those who can least afford it. Taxes that put a larger burden lower income folks are generally considered ‘regressive’, aren’t they?

While I have actually benefitted from having the lottery in South Dakota, I’ve always felt that the lottery is a poor way for any government to garner income. I don’t expect the lottery to go away any time soon; since being implemented, pulling the plug on the system has been on the ballot three times, and each time a majority voted to have it continue. And that’s too bad because all those millions of dollars could be better spent strengthening the real economy of the state, not filling up the economic trash bin.

I just got this by email this afternoon:

In an inspiring display of bipartisan bridge-building, talk radio personality Rush Limbaugh has accepted Jim Wallis’ invitation to deliver a keynote address at Sojourners’ Mobilization to End Poverty conference in April.

“I’ve always said the monologue of the extreme right is over, and a new dialogue has begun,” said Wallis. “Well, that dialogue is about to get a whole lot louder.”

Bipartisan bridge-building? Whatever. This was a shock to me. But then, I remembered what day it was. Wow; did I get snookered with that! Look at me, the classic April Fool.

I’ve been working on a post about the Sojourners for a while now, and I suppose this is as good an opportunity to finish it up as any. I bumped into the Sojourners a while back and subscribed to their newsletter emailing list out of curiosity. From what I’ve read in those newsletters and on their website, saying that the Sojourners politics is left of center is a gross understatement. Their mission is based on what they call ‘social justice’, and they talk a lot about ending poverty, with seemingly no qualms about employing the government to make it happen. The tone of their newsletters has been next to giddy ever since Obama won the Presidency, presumably because Sojourners sees Obama as one of their own; a leftist determined to even the score between the have’s and the have-not’s in this country through some sort of government-imposed income redistribution.

I would take issue with the Sojourners for that alone, but it doesn’t stop there; they couch their program in Christian jargon, as if Jesus’ mission for Christians was to eliminate poverty through any means possible, including confiscatory taxes on the so-called ‘wealthy’ so the wealth can be “spread around”.

And that’s what really made me wonder what was behind Rush Limbaugh speaking at their big event. Of course, it was just a gag, complete with a hacked version of Limbaugh’s CPAC “national address” from earlier this year, reworded to have Rush mouthing the words that tickle their ears.

I’ve talked about this subject before; Jesus’ primary mission while on this Earth wasn’t to feed the poor or heal the sick or make the lame whole. He was here to save all of Mankind and to bring atonement for our sins. Did he feed the poor and heal the sick and make the lame whole? Sure. But he didn’t focus on that, and neither should we. Especially if doing that involves stealing what some people have rightfully earned so that we can, as our now-President so eloquently put it, “spread the wealth around”.

I made a quick run to the inlaws’ house tonight, about a 60 mile drive, each way. Along the way I made a few observations…

1. Since the BMW doesn’t have a working odometer, I thought this might be a good opportunity to check the gas mileage, so I filled up before leaving Sioux Falls and again at the same station when I got back. On the 117.6 mile trip I used 5.074 gallons of fuel, which translates to 23.18 miles per gallon. Not bad, especially considering the, um, spirited driving enjoyed along the way.
2. The driving was particularly spirited along one of my favorite drives, a lonely 8 mile stretch of highway that runs along the river between Beloit, IA, and Fairview, SD. I hit three digits each way through there tonight; what a blast! On the way out there was a Ford F350 pickup traveling the same direction. I thought I’d overtake him quickly, but he was cooking along at a little over 90. I think he was a little surprised when I blew by him at about 120 or so. The white stripes on the highway zip by pretty quickly at that speed.

   My observation? Moving along at 55-60mph feels like a crawl when you were doing twice that only moments before. Also, it’s amazing how smooth and stable that ratty looking e28 is at high speeds.

3. The stars! I stopped along the way on the return trip just to take in the view. It’s amazing how much more you can see in the sky without the light interference you find in the city. I’m becoming more convinced that people who spend most of their time in urban environments tend to become more detached from their Creator. It’s easy to think that man is the epitome of evolution when all you see is man-made. Here’s a tip; first chance you get, get far enough out of Dodge to escape the glow dome surrounding the city — about 30 miles or so — so you can really see the sky. It is truly amazing, and humbling. It makes a guy feel really small and insignificant, and makes one wonder how the God of the universe could take an interest in something so small.

That’s all I can think of right now. Other than a few niggling issues with the car that popped up along the way. The cruise control was working fine most of the way, but near my destination on the way out the brake light warning came on, and the cruise control wouldn’t work. It came back on for the return trip, but later the brake light warning came on again, and again the cruise wouldn’t work. The power windows quit working a couple of days ago, but along the way I fiddled with the breaker switch under the dash and they started working again, for a short time. That narrows down the possible problem areas anyway. Also, the brake pedal seems to be getting a little on the soft side; might have to bring it over to Abe & have him check things over.

A couple of Sundays before Christmas last, our pastor delivered a short devotional to accompany the church’s Christmas Cantata in the morning service, and one of his three points was something that really hadn’t occurred to me before…

And in the same region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with fear. And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.”

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,
“Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!”

I always get goosebumps when I read the stories of angelic visits in the Bible and elsewhere; can you imagine the shock experienced by the shepherds when that angel popped in? “Fear not,” they always say… “Too late!” I’d say (if I could say anything, that is.) “‘Scuse me while I go clean out my drawers.” But did you catch that in the second paragraph? It was a heavenly host; not a choir, not a group, not a quartet. A host. The term “host” in medieval Latin literally means “army”. It was an army that was sent to announce the Savior’s birth!

While the message was delivered to the shepherds — they were the only ones mentioned in the narrative — the message was directed more at Satan, challenging the authority he held over the earth. The statement “Glory to God in the highest” was the angels’ way of putting Satan in his place in relation to God; God is in the highest place, and all else is under his dominion, even Satan. And that message delivered by a host — an army of angels… Imagine the sound of that; the mental image I get is of the Promise Keepers events I’ve attended with the sound of tens of thousands of voices chanting or singing in unison. (Like the time Steve Green led us in singing The Battle Hymn of the Republic for the closing song at the Boulder, CO, PK event some years ago. Goosebumps again!)

Back to the sermon; Pastor Petersen said it much better than I can rephrase it, so here’s a transcript of the second point from his message from that day (taken from the message posted online, from 11:43 to 16:20.)

Warfare.
Warfare!
Warfare?
Why are you talking about warfare at a time like this? A time like Christmas?
Because the glory of God is the focal point of all spiritual warfare. Satan, from the beginning, has desired God’s glory. He wanted it, and he did everything he could to get it. And as a result he ravaged the world, set it on a course for destruction.
Listen to what Isaiah wrote in Chapter 14 about Satan himself:
How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!
You said in your heart, ”

Now this is the heart of Satan himself…

“You said in your heart,
“I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [a]
I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.”

Over & over Satan’s heart was to be above God!

Listen to what’s said at the birth of Jesus;
“Glory to God in the…” say it with me… “Highest!” The highest!

Now also note what we’re told in Luke chapter 2 verse 11. Please note, it doesn’t say there was a choir. There was no choir present at the birth of Jesus. Do you know what was present? A military unit. An army was at the birth of Jesus. Not a choir, not people dressed in white robes playing harps, it was a military campaign. “Heavenly host” means “heavenly army”, an army of God fitted with the angels of heaven. The mighty ones of God. And they were at the birth of Jesus. Not singing lullabies, but declaring warfare.

Satan has been against God from the beginning, he’s trying to take glory from God, and we’re here to tell you the gauntlet has been put down, the war has begun, the Son of God is here, Glory to God in the highest.

Is there another Amen here? Amen!

That little baby grew to be a boy and a man, and went right to the cross, and at the cross the climax of spiritual warfare occurred. where Jesus died for the sins of the world, so that anyone who would receive him would be forgiven of their sins, receive the very power of God in their lives to live for God and to do spiritual warfare in this world.

Because Paul says in the New Testament, Ephesians chapter 6, our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the forces of darkness in this world. How on Earth do we have hope against the forces of darkness? Ahhh! Glory to God… In the highest. Jesus Christ makes it possible.

In all the times I’ve heard that story, that’s the first I can recall where the angelic host was referred to as something other than musical accompaniment to the arrival of the Christ Child. The image of a choir of angels never seemed quite right or satisfying to me… The story of the birth of Jesus plays an important part in the whole of the Gospel narrative, but the glurge that often goes with it can be a bit much. Jesus came to Earth to set things right, and God knew that’s something Satan wouldn’t like. It would take more than a choir to send the proper message, so the angelic army was to show that God meant business; that Jesus had at his disposal all the power of God.

Too many people want to keep Jesus in the manger; he’s safer and more controllable there, but that’s not what Jesus’ mission was. He came to shake things up, and for that I am thankful.

Many people who think of themselves as Christians and “good people” only want to see the calm and peace-loving side of Jesus. I remember arguing with some friends about this subject during the run-up to the Iraq war; they questioned how I could, as a Christian, support the war, because after all, Jesus said to “turn the other cheek”, so Christians were supposed to be all about peace and happiness and forgiving those who’ve wronged us. But Jesus was very upfront about his purpose on Earth;

“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn
” ‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw—
a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
Jesus — Matthew 10:34-36

I don’t write this trying to justify the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — that’s far too complicated for one so easily distracted as me — but Jesus knew that his coming would bring conflict, and because he is both God and Man, that conflict crosses over from the spiritual realm to the physical. He also warned his followers that the enemy’s hatred would carry over to them — and to us, two centuries removed. The Fall was a the first earthly manifestation of that conflict, and we’ve been suffering in it ever since. The problem is that whether we acknowledge it or not, we’re in a war. I firmly believe that the negative attitudes toward and persecution of Christians and Jews throughout the ages are a direct result of that war, but many think that if we can only convince those doing the persecuting that we aren’t so bad, they’ll be nicer.

The trouble is that there is no logical earthly cause behind their hatred, and all the peace talks in the world won’t end it. The conflict will only end with the triumphant return of Jesus, accompanied by that same angelic host, in even greater force, and with even more to say than on that starry night oh so long ago.

image; “White Rose” by Gustave Doré.

Since my track record for keeping past New Year’s Resolutions has been pretty poor — I usually end up headed in the opposite direction of what I resolve to do — I thought this year I’d maybe try a little reverse psychology. Maybe I’ll actually get where I want to go.

So, I hereby resolve to…

1. Gain weight. I’m thinking at least 40 pounds. Just more of me to love, right?
2. Not even think about exercising. I’d resolve to quit exercising, but I can’t very well stop if I’m not doing it in the first place. Total waste of time.
3. Read less, and I’ll hide my Bible. Quiet time? Devotions? Spiritual disciplines? Who needs them?
4. Watch more TV. I might even break down and get cable. From what people at work talk about, I’ve been missing some good stuff.
5. Procrastinate more. Then again, maybe I’ll wait & do that next year.
6. Take up a new habit: Maybe drinking. And smoking would be good too. And as long as I’m at it, I’ll start hitting the casinos.
7. Spend more time at work.
8. Spend less time with the wife & kids. That only deepen any emotional attachment to them, which interferes with #7.
9. Take a vacation to someplace important: like to see the largest ball of twine.
10. Stop going home for lunch or bringing a sack lunch to work: We all need to do our part for stimulating the economy, and fast food restaurants play an important role in that, right?
11. Quit giving money & time to charity. It’s time to let someone else develop character in that way.
12. Sell my car and buy a mid-’70′s Camaro or Monte Carlo with a really loud stereo system, mag wheels, air shocks and wide tires in back. I’ll also need to grow a mullet to complete the image.
13. Shower and change clothes once a week, whether I need it or not. A guy has to do his part to to reduce water usage.
14. Cash out my 401k accounts. The markets are going nowhere fast, and just think of the fun I could have with all that money.
15. Stay up later still every night. Think of all the late-night TV and web browsing I can get done instead of sleeping. Most days at work I feel like I’m spinning wheels anyway, so showing up half asleep shouldn’t affect a thing productivity-wise.

Well, that should pretty much do it. Here’s hoping I keep a perfect track record. Of failing to achieve what I resolve to do.

A worried woman went to her gynecologist and said: “Doctor, I have a serious problem and desperately need your help! My baby is not even 1 year old and I’m pregnant again. I don’t want kids so close together.”

So the doctor said: “OK, and what do you want me to do?”

She said: “I want you to end my pregnancy, and I’m counting on your help with this.”

The doctor thought for a little, and after some silence he said to the lady: “I think I have a better solution for your problem. It’s less dangerous for you too.”

She smiled, thinking that the doctor was going to accept her request.

Then he continued: “You see, in order for you not to have to take care of 2 babies at the same time, let’s kill the one in your arms. This way, you could rest some before the other one is born. If we’re going to kill one of them, it doesn’t matter which one it is. There would be no risk for your body if you chose the one in your arms.”

The woman was horrified and said: “No doctor! How terrible! It’s a crime to kill a child!”

“I agree,” the doctor replied. “But you seemed to be OK with it, so I thought maybe that was the best solution.” The doctor smiled, realizing that he had made his point.

He convinced the mom that there is no difference in killing a child that’s already been born and one that’s still in the womb. The crime is the same, even if killing the unborn child is “legal”.

I’ve got a new favorite song. Not exactly new; it’s Grace Like Rain by Todd Agnew (iTunes link), which is Agnew’s rendition of the 250 year old Amazing Grace by John Newton. I love the song to begin with; adding Agnew’s gritty vocals makes it that much more appealing.

Amazing Grace has been around since about 1772, but the lyrics still hold their meaning for today’s Christian.

Amazing Grace
Amazing grace, how sweet the sound
That sav’d a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears reliev’d;
How precious did that grace appear,
The hour I first believ’d!

Thro’ many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
’Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

The Lord has promis’d good to me,
His word my hope secures;
He will my shield and portion be,
As long as life endures.

Yes, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease;
I shall possess, within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, who call’d me here below,
Will be forever mine.

Many hymnbooks — and Agnew’s rendition — add the following verse, which isn’t attributed to Newton, but it’s got to be one of my favorites:

When we’ve been there ten thousand years,
Bright shining as the sun,
We’ve no less days to sing God’s praise
Than when we’d first begun.

Some say it doesn’t fit well with the rest of the song, being “we” instead of “I”, but I still like it, and the thoughts of eternity it conjures.

If you haven’t heard Todd Agnew’s music, take a listen. His album Grace Like Rain contains several other songs that are revamped versions of old hymns, treating them respectfully, doing an excellent job of conveying age-old concepts of the Christian faith. Thanks, Todd, for your work. I look forward to hearing your other CD’s.

It seems that for some people, dreams are fragile things, like a glass figurine. They are very solid and tangible, but can be easily broken and destroyed — shattered. I don’t know if I’m weird or what, but I find that to be really hard to comprehend dreams like that, and there are times when I feel envious of someone who does have dreams and ambitions that are solid and tangible.

I guess people can be categorized in two groups according to their dreams & ambitions; those for whom dreams are solid & tangible, and those for whom dreams are more fluid and resilient. I would fall into the second group; my dreams would be better described as “fluid”.

I talked with an old friend a while back who is having a tough time because he’s been hurt in the process of chasing a dream he has had since childhood. He worked hard for a very long time to do what he felt he was called to do, and in the end, with the fulfillment of that dream within reach, he’s now doing something totally unrelated, and continues to nurse his wounds. I look at his situation and have a tough time putting myself in his shoes; I just can’t understand that kind of attachment to a goal, and that kind of hurt when things don’t go well.

For me, there are just so many little things I enjoy that I can’t fathom chasing after one thing in particular and banking everything the fulfillment of that one thing. Having more fluid or diversified ambitions has served me well in some respects, but in others I’d be better off with the other. To some I’m sure it appears that I lack ambition and drive — I know my boss sees it that way — and to a degree that’s probably true.

The difference comes in when bad things happen; to someone with dreams that are concrete and tangible, bad things can come along and shatter them all to bits. And those bits have sharp edges that can wound. But for me, with dreams that are more fluid and resilient, bad things can shake up my bucket of dreams, causing some to splash out, but I won’t be hurt by any of it.

Is it something of a protection mechanism to avoid being hurt? Or is it a manifestation of ADD? Or maybe something that’s come about as part of a fear of success? I don’t know, but I sometimes feel a yearning for that sense of drive… That kind of dedication.

“The best piece of parenting advice I’ve heard came from flight attendants; in case of emergency, put on your own oxygen mask first.”
Randy Pausch

Randy said that during an interview with Diane Sawyer that was broadcast earlier this week. Makes sense to me; if a parent isn’t taking care of himself/herself, they’re not doing the kids any favors.

Good advice.

I’ve heard that Randy’s Last Lecture is a must-see for everyone. I haven’t seen it myself (yet), but I have it on good authority…

Kyle-Anne Shiver has written another brilliant piece about Barack Obama over at American Thinker; in her morning prayers she thanks “God for the emergence of Barack Obama. Not because my hope is in Obama, but because my hope is always, unequivocally in God.”

While I can’t say that I’ve thanked God for BHO any time lately (like, never), and only hope for his defeat this November, I can see the logic and wisdom in Kyle-Anne’s words. It’s so clear that Obama isn’t fit for the Presidency — and becoming clearer every day — that there really isn’t any choice to be made come election day. He is not just an empty suit, he is The Empty Suit with an empty resume. And that’s one reason to be thankful for him — that the choice will be so easy for so many Americans.

Unfortunately, there is a sizable number who cannot see past his flowery yet empty speeches to the shallowness of the doomed promises he makes, and will cast their votes for him anyway. That’s too bad.

I could go on about this, but will just encourage you to just read Kyle-Anne’s column. Another good one to read is from last month, where she asserts that the coming election could be a landslide, with Obama on the losing end. (Link) I happen to think that might come true. And so does George McGovern. How else can you explain McGovern’s early support of Obama unless he secretly hopes that Obama will take away his shame by losing even bigger than he did back in 1972.