Fool or Genius?

I apologize for being away for over a month. I've been busy at work and also a little bit out of the blogging mood. But I hope to get back into the swing of things and perhaps to some lighter subject material. If the Bengals keep winning, that might be easy.

However, I've been reading a great deal lately about Pope Benedict's comments regarding Mohammed and the subsequent outpouring of rage by the Muslim community. Everything that I've read seems to imply that Benedict was a fool or completely unaware of what his quote of the Byzantine Emperor would do. Yet after watching all this evolve over the past couple of weeks, I've come to a rather different conclusion. Benedict knew exactly what he was doing and is prepping for a grand master plan.

First, let us point out that Benedict is around 80 years old and has been working his way around in the affairs of religious politics for a very long time. The incident with the Danish cartoons depicting Mohammed told everyone exactly what the Muslim community's reaction would be to a perceived slight. Stating that their religion is only spread through fear and violence would obviously set the people off, despite the very stupid notion that by doing so they validate the Byzantine Emperor's opinion of them. There was ample warning of the reaction and only a blind fool would have not seen what would have happened after making those comments.

However, once you read the reaction of the non-Muslim masses regarding the Pope's comments and the Muslim reaction, one comes away with an interesting notion. The West (and indeed most of the world) is currently divided into two camps regarding Islam: those opposed to it and those willing to submit to Islam in the sake of peace. However, after the Pope made his comments, even those who are willing to concede many things to the Muslims in the sake of peace and out of fear of violence think that the Muslim reaction and anger was overblown, especially given the context of the Pope's comments and his repeated attempts to calm the waves. In essence, even though they might not necessarily be religious people or specifically Catholic, the non-Muslim community was brought just a little bit tighter together in opposition of the irrational anger of the Muslims.

If you scan about a look at the major religions of the world, they are all currently in conflict with Islam in some fashion. Christianity wars upon Al-Qaida and other Islamic terrorists in the Middle East and there have been several terrorist incidents and Islamic uprisings in Europe. Judaism and Islam mix like oil and water. Muslims and Hindus fight repeated pitched battles in Kashmir and other places about India. Muslim guerrillas have been fighting against Buddhists in the Philippines, eastern China, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and several other locations in southeast Asia. All it really takes is for enough fear and resolve to build throughout these groups before they unite together against Islam. Yes, its not like Buddhists and Christians have much in common, but when threatened the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This becomes even more pronounced when you see belligerent Muslim nations working very hard to develop nuclear weapons.

This unification probably won't happen overnight, but with his remarks, I believe Benedict has taken a large step towards everyone getting comfortable with the idea of a great unification. Benedict's plan probably involves taking them all under the Roman banner of a future Pope as the Catholic church is the wealthiest and most unified body among all the major religions of the world. This unification will also probably ease everyone's palate and turn a blind eye when Israel finally says enough and beats her Arab neighbors down to the point where they cannot make war on her ever again (an incident that I think is coming very soon). By playing the fool, Benedict has made a significant step forward in the goal a unified superstate/religion. A great war will be required to make it fully come to pass, but man has never shown a problem with going down that road before.

Book Thoughts

I stole this from my sister’s blog. I thought it might be an interesting change of pace:

1. One book that changed your life:
In a strange, convoluted way, Anne of Green Gables by LM Montgomery. I first read the book when I was in 4th grade and was interested enough that I read the entire series. I put them away after a while, but when I was in college I pulled them out again. My interest in them and the movies based on them led me to stumble on a forum devoted to the third movie, which was to be released in 2000 (it was a terrible movie, completely unlike the books). It was through this forum that I eventually met Mrs. X, which led me to move from my old job to my current job. A long string of event based off a random reading in 1987.

2. One book that you've read more than once:
I have officially lost count of the times that I have read The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien. I first read it when I was about 9 or 10 and enjoyed it so much that I have reread the book many times. In fact, the first copy I had was duct taped together for a while I had read it so much. I now have a nice hardcover edition that I pull off the shelf on occasion.

3. One book you'd want on a desert island:
In the vein of the last post, I would pick the Lord of the Rings trilogy (which they can sell as one book). It’s a very long, engaging read that should pass the time sufficiently while I wait for rescue.

4. One book that made you laugh:
I don’t read a lot of pure comedy books, although I do have a lot of comic collections. One of the few I do have is Fatherhood by Bill Cosby. A lot of things he references I’ve seen in his stand up acts and it makes for an amusing read.

5. One book that made you cry:
I don’t know that I’ve ever cried when reading a book, however, I do recall getting extremely angry while reading few books, mostly due to frustration with the character’s stupidity. Probably the one I recall the easiest is Needful Things by Stephen King. On at least one occasion, I wanted to step into the book and strangle several of the characters for acting in such a stupid fashion.

6. One book you wish had been written:
This is hard because just about every good movie or story I’ve heard has been based on a book. I’ll have to leave this one blank.

7. One book you wish had never been written:
Great Expectations by Charles Dickens. I’m no fan of Dickens under most circumstances, but I couldn’t stand this story. Days of Our Lives has had less convoluted and eyebrow raising plots.

8. One book you're currently reading:
I haven’t started it yet, but I’ve put Band of Brothers on reserve at the library. Mrs. X and I just finished watching the miniseries and I thought it might be interesting to get more details in the book.

9. One book you've been meaning to read:
There are a lot of these. One that’s been sitting by my bed for quite a while is Love and War by John Jakes. It’s the second book in the North and South series and I’ve started it twice but always put it down and never gotten back to it. Maybe later this winter I’ll pick it up and stick with it.

10. One book that has scared the crap out of you:
It didn’t exactly scare me, but I was deeply disturbed by the novella The Long Walk by Richard Bachmann (aka Stephen King). A very disturbing story about a fascist US that holds a contest where 50 young men walk continuously in competition. If you fall behind a set speed too often, you are shot. Last man standing wins a big prize. Very disturbing concept.

11. The one book that is most recommended to others by you:
Mrs. X has repeatedly recommended the Generations books. They’re a non-fiction series dealing with historical trends and patterns among the various generations and how one can use these trends to observe various sociological patterns. I keep meaning to read them but never quite get around to it.

The Momentary Calm

With the cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel signed, all the religious types are starting to sit down again. I however am taking a slightly more long view. In previous posts I thought this looked like the Amos war. I still believe that, however the finishing of it may not come for another year.

Israel and Hezbollah have signed a Hunda, a temporary halt to hostilities that Muslims use to regroup and retool before launching a fresh attack whenever it suits them. Mohammed famously used this when he signed a ten-year treaty with the tribe holding Mecca after being defeated by them in battle. Mohammed returned to Medina, regrouped his army and then launched a surprise attack two years later, successfully taking Mecca. This is what Hezbollah has agreed to.

We should also remember that Israel is still fighting with Hamas in the south. That has gotten very little airtime with the war in Lebanon, but operations continue there as well, though not to the scale as in the north.

Prime Minister Olmert’s government will fall eventually but I don’t believe it will happen in the next few days as some predict. The other parties will try, but Labor and Kedima are still in tight lockstep. There will have to be some defections for a vote of no confidence to be declared. I suspect that Olmert’s government will not collapse until he tried to implement his pull out of the West Bank. That will push enough people over the edge that the government will collapse. Once the new leaders are elected (more to the right and perhaps even a stronger representation from the Orthodox parties), Iran and Syria might feel that they have no choice but to resume fighting before Israel has a chance to recover her morale and get the army back into a strong fighting force.

Either way, I’m still holding to my position that by June of next year, we will start seeing some major happenings over there. We might recall that WWII began with Germany conquering Poland in three weeks in September. Then nothing happened until Hitler launched the campaign against France in the spring. I believe this is a lull, the calm to give the Muslim armies confidence to jump in with both feet next time.

There is also supposedly the chance that Iran could do something stupid to flare things up by Tuesday (Aug 22). I’m beginning to think that Iran is backing off that date for the moment and might defer it until next year. After all, the 12th Imam has waited over 1400 years. He can wait one more year. 2007 is looking to be a banger year over there.

In another Biblical doubletake, Strategypage is reporting that Ethiopia and Somalia are preparing to go to war with each other. Strategypage is predicting an Ethiopian win, however, I would caution them that Sudan might intervien on behalf of their radiacal Muslim bretherin in Somalia. If the two sides unite and push the Christian Ethiopians back, we could well have a united pan-Islamic state on the Horn of Africa. Not exactly making it the nicest place for US or Israeli interests, to say nothing of what that would mean in terms of extending ties with Iran.

I would also suggest that people keep an eye on Egypt during this time. I don't know when it will erupt, but a civil war is brewing there too. The Muslim Brotherhood is becoming increasily violent towards the government in power and I don't think it will take much for them to try and take over the government. Especially if Hamas and Hezbollah are defeated in the war with Israel. Hamas is a direct offshoot of this group and they feel that Egypt should be in the war, hitting Israel from the south as Syria and Lebanon are from the north. I give the over-under on an Egyptian civil war 3 years.

Thoughts and Reunions

No matter how religious you are, or how much you believe in certain passages of the Bible, it is still a bit freaky to hear something on the news and have it printed directly for you in the Bible.

As I have mentioned before, I have postulated that the current war between Hezbollah/Hamas and Israel, is the opening salvo in the war mentioned in the book of Amos. This morning, I was listening to a discussion of the war and one of the commentators mentioned that according to various news reports, Hezbollah has a large array of bunkers hidden by brush scattered throughout Lebanon and Syria in a manner very similar to Japanese tactics used on Iwo Jima. The commentator noted that when the US fought the Japanese, they were forced to go into the fortified hills and burn away the brush using flame throwers before they could go in and either flush the bunkers or destroy them using air power. This is the system that Hezbollah has set up.

Now, relate this scenario as to how Israel is going to have to deal with Hezbollah to this passage in the book of Amos: “I will send fire upon the walls of Tyre that will consume her fortresses.” Most of the bunkers are in the south, arrayed in a pattern surrounding the major cities of Tyre and Beirut. If one views these bunkers as small fortresses (and I think any sensible military commander would) and knowing the methods that Israel will have to use to root them out, it does give one pause and a little bit of gooseflesh.

On a lighter note, my high school class had their 10-year reunion this past Saturday. I did not go as that would have required putting Mrs. X and Baby X (who is now three months old) in a long car ride for a party that I’m not sure I would have been that comfortable at. But the main organizer did send out a couple of pictures of those who went. Using my yearbook, I was able to successfully identify all but one person in the photo and I have a guess as to who she is (I needed the yearbook for names. Even though we only had 80 people in the class, I only went there two years and didn’t really interact with over half the class). It is amusing to see how much some people have changed and how little some others have. I was also mildly amused to see She Who Must Not Be Named there as well, especially given that she had told me on a couple of occasions that she had no interest in ever going to a High School Reunion. But, I did notice that she seems to be connected with someone again and I can only wish her the best.

Lieberman's Window

Several months ago, if you had said that Joe Lieberman was going to lose the Democratic nomination for Senate, most people would have laughed at you. But now that looks like it’s going to be the case. Ned Lamont leads Joe Lieberman 54-41 in the latest poll of likely Democratic primary voters.

Most people will talk about other symptoms, but I think this is another example of God forcing his people back to Israel. I know George Bush is a lightning rod of hate on the Left by now, but how could a single issue candidate (the war in Iraq) defeat a man who is more liberal than the Minority Leader of the Senate (Harry Reid – NV). Yet that is exactly what is happening. Lieberman will push ahead and run as an independent and that will most likely have two results. Lamont will win anyway because enough Connecticut voters will knee jerk vote for the guy with the “D” next to his name, or Lieberman will steal enough votes from Lamont and the independents that the Republican challenger will win in a bizarre 35-32-33 race. Especially if the second option happens, Lieberman will be hounded out of Democratic politics.

Now, despite what most of the world thinks, I think the current conflict in Israel will last quite a while, perhaps as long as a year or more. More countries will get dragged into it and as Israel’s methods get harsher in trying to secure peace, animosity towards Jews will increase around the world. I saw on the news last night a report from a group of Jewish teenagers who had been in Israel when the fighting started and despite the need for security, all they talked about was how much they loved the country and couldn’t wait to go back.

I believe that a majority of the Jewish people in the world have a secret love of the home country buried within them and I think that as anti-Semitism grows over the next couple of years, we will see a significant migration back to Israel. So, it really wouldn’t surprise me if we hear in 2010 that Joe Lieberman has been appointed as Israel’s ambassador to the United States or even to a higher office. God may be shutting the Senate door to open the Israeli window for Mr. Lieberman.

Presidential Candidates

I was discussing with a co-worker about the chaos that will reign in American politics in the near future with no clear front-runners on either side. For some reference, I’m putting together a list that we can all look back on and try to determine who came out of where once we have left the Bush II era behind.

Democrats:

1) Hillary Clinton – Sen. (NY). Presumed front-runner, although much debate as to whether she could win the general election.
2) John Kerry – 2004 candidate. Still strong, although still plagued by same weaknesses of 2004 campaign.
3) John Edwards – 2004 VP candidate. Came close to winning the 2004 nomination. Has been circulating himself well and storm to the front of the pack with a win in Iowa
4) Russ Feingold – Sen. (WI). Far Left candidate and will appeal to hard core Deaniacs. Probably not strong enough to get nomination, but could seriously affect the outcome of the nomination.
5) Mark Warner – Ex-Gov. (VA). Recently retired governor has a large war chest and is reasonably well liked in the South. More moderate than Edwards, he could win if the Democrats embrace a Bill Clinton type compromise candidate.
6) Christopher Dodd – Sen. (CT). Minor candidate. Probably will drop out after New Hampshire primary.
7) Joseph Biden – Sen. (DE). Minor candidate. Might be forced to drop out prior to any primaries due to tendency to place his foot in his mouth.
8) Bill Richardson – Gov (NM). A strong Hispanic candidate and former Clinton era cabinet official. Richardson has had fluctuating popularity and is probably far behind in money collected, but he could be a very viable candidate if immigration becomes the touchstone of 2008.
9) Al Gore? – Gore has denied that he is running, although if the Democrats fail to capitalize on the opportunities in 2006, he may enter the ring to try and rescue the party.

Republicans:

1) John McCain – Sen. (AZ). McCain never stopped running in 2000. While popular with the Media and some moderates, McCain’s love of first amendment regulation has angered the base. He may not be able to sway enough of the base to secure the nomination, although he could probably peel enough Democrats to win the general election.
2) Rudy Guliani – Ex-Mayor (NY). Rudy has yet to declare himself, but he is widely expected to dip his toe into the waters soon. His socially liberal positions don’t sit well with some in the base, but many love his direct and powerful leadership style. He could be a strong spoiler if he chose to enter (read: potential VP candidate)
3) William Frist – Sen. (TN). Frist is abandoning the Senate to devote his full attention to running for President. His record in the Senate is rather wishy-washy and he has watery personality, but he might appeal to Southerners. He would actually be better served to run for governor of Tennessee, where he is very popular, and get some legislative muscle under his belt before running for President.
4) Mitt Romney – Gov. (MA). Romney is socially liberal but conservative economically. He has done well in the heavily Democratic Massachusetts and it could springboard him forward. However, there has been some question as to whether the Christian Coalition will rally behind a Mormon candidate. This could hurt Romney in the Bible-Belt states.
5) Newt Gingrich – Ex-Congressmen (GA). Newt has resurrected himself from the ashes, decrying the spending and foreign policies of the current administration. He still carries a lot of baggage and will probably not do well outside of some Southern states unless Congressional malfeasance and pork become the center of the debate.
6) Sam Brownback – Sen. (KS). A minor candidate who will appeal to the conservative Christian Coalition. He might stir here and there, but it not a real threat to get the nomination.
7) George Allen – Sen. (VA). Economically conservative and socially more conservative than most of his rivals, Allen could carry himself far if he could find a way to distinguish himself. However, he is the candidate most in the Bush mold at the moment and even Republicans are getting tired of the Bush mold.
8) Mike Huckabee – Gov. (AR). Another undeclared candidate, but one of the few Washington outsiders that might make a good run. Conservative both economically and socially, Huckabee could claim knowledge of how to efficiently run a government as he has overseen a successful economic recovery in Arkansas.
9) Rick Perry – Gov. (TX). Bush’s former Lt. Governor who has become more popular in Texas than Bush was. Perry could bring many of the same qualities as Huckabee to the table, but he will become strongest if illegal immigration comes to the fore again as his policies of border enforcement have been reasonably popular throughout the Southwest.

I’m sure there are others that I have forgotten, but I think these 18 represent the largest runners in the field at this particular time.

Waiting for Ezekiel

As I am nearly finished with the Left Behind books (at least the main series) I can understand some of the fervent desire among many that the war in Israel is the beginning of the War of Gog, which many Christians believe is the last major event before the Rapture and the Tribulation. However, it always bothers me when people allow their desires to cloud their judgment. A simple examination of the nature of the prophecy gives an excellent indication that not only is this not the beginning of the war, but that we still have a ways to go before we get to that point.

The thing that drives people the most is the knowledge that Russia and Iran have recently formed a strategic alliance. As Russia and Iran are mentioned as the primary players in the war, it’s easy to get carried away and think that they are the singular forces. However, we forget that there are several other prominent members of the alliance: Turkey (Gomer, Beth Togarmah), Libya (Put), and Cush (modern Sudan and Ethiopia). Libya has been cowed as of late to almost a non-entity, Sudan and Ethiopia are in the midst of civil wars and steadily becoming radical Islamic states (similar to Taliban Afghanistan), and Turkey is still a predominantly secular state, worried more about smoothing things over and becoming a member of the EU than anything else. Even Russia herself has no geopolitical reason to launch a massive invasion of Israel at the moment. She is still concerned in getting influence through proxies like Syria (with whom Russia recently signed a large military contract with). None of these countries (with the exception of Iran) is any position to band up and launch a massive ground invasion of Israel at the moment.

A second flaw is the geographic nature of Israel at the time of the invasion. Ezekiel 38:8 notes that the Jews have regathered into the land and have settled to the mountains of Israel. Israel is rather hilly country but the “mountains of Israel”, as often quoted in scripture, specifically refer to the territory of Ephraim and Benjamin. This region is currently under the dominion of the Palestinians under the name of the West Bank. Israel has not even fully received her inheritance of the land yet. What’s more, the Jews themselves have not even fully regathered to Israel yet. The total Jewish population of New York is still greater than the Jewish population of Israel. I myself don’t believe that we have fully seen the fulfillment of the prophecy of the Valley of Dry Bones (Ezekiel 37:1-14). If we are still in the works on that prophecy, how can we even hope to be ready to move on to Ezekiel 38 and 39?

A third point is the state of Israel’s affairs. At the time of the attack, Israel lives at peace and in a land of unwalled villages. Many scholars have tried to argue that Israel has been more at peace than any other time in her history starting in the late 80s. Yet they have been undergoing continuous suicide attacks from the Palestinians and numerous raids and harassment from Hezbollah. The DMZ of the Golan Heights is one of the most armed places in the world and Israel is in the process of building a large wall around her territory, especially in the region of Jerusalem. At no point would any person living in Israel stand up and say that they are living in a state of peace and safety.

Yet, I am not willing to say that we are not seeing prophecy fulfilled. I have no major rationalization for my feeling, but as I have alluded to in previous posts, I believe this new war could be the fulfillment of the prophecies of Amos and could spill over to some of the prophecies of Isaiah. Notable in their absence among the invaders in the War of Gog, are all the immediate neighbors of Israel. Yet all of these (with the exception of Egypt) are mentioned in Amos. The first two chapters of Amos imply that all the nations surrounding Israel have committed three major sins and that the fourth sin will bring about the judgment of God. Damascus (Syria) will be consumed with fire; Gaza (the Philistines aka the Palestinians) will be wiped out; Tyre (southern Lebanon) will have her military destroyed; Edom, Moab, and Ammon (Jordan) will be overrun and destroyed.

Israel has endured three major wars with Syrian and Jordan (1948, 1967, and 1973). The Palestinians formed themselves as a military force through the PLO in 1964, but did not directly assault Israel until the 1970’s, choosing instead to act through small (but highly visible) terrorist attacks. They attacked Israel in the Lebanese Civil War (1982) and have brought about armed uprisings through the First and Second Intafadas (1987, 2000). Lebanon has existed predominantly as a Syrian and PLO proxy through her wars with Israel. She existed as a staging area for PLO and Hezbollah attacks against Israel in the 1973 war and fought against Israel when she was forced to invade in both 1978 and 1982. Only through Israeli occupation (which ended in 2000) has southern Lebanon managed to gain any form of stability. With the withdrawal of Israeli forces six years ago, Hezbollah have entrenched themselves and will not be driven out quietly.

Now, could I be wrong? Sure. Scripture never mentions the influence of Persia on affairs during this war (and everyone knows Iran is involved in this one). What’s more, Syria and Jordan are not directly involved in the current war (although Syria is funneling weapons to Hezbollah). Israel may beat down Hezbollah and Hamas and then turn back leaving things unresolved. But my gut tells me that things are not going that way. Israel is not going to stop until they are satisfied that they will be left alone and that just won’t happen until Hezbollah and Hamas (indeed, all of the Palestinian groups) are destroyed.

I believe that the war will continue and eventually Syria will be dragged into it, if only to protect their proxy interests in the form of Hezbollah. I don’t know what could bring Jordan into the fight, unless there is a successful coup against King Abdullah II. If his (and most of his government’s) influence were removed, most of the Jordanian people would immediately rush to support a Palestinian war effort against Israel. Perhaps a military coup will occur, under the auspices of Hamas. Yasser Arafat tried to overthrow King Abdullah I many years ago and failed. Perhaps a second stab at things will succeed. Once all her neighbors are against her Israel may be forced to turn to unconventional weapons, which will bring loud condemnation from the world. But if they are successful and Israel claims the land of Syria, Jordan, and the occupied territories, and then signs a security pact with the liberated government of Lebanon, Israel could well be on her way to securing a land of peace, untroubled by fears of attack. Then I believe we can enter into discussions about the invasion of Gog.

Iran's Plans

Someone made an interesting comment on the blog lgf the other day that got me thinking. This person noted that the President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, sent President Bush a letter a little while back encouraging him to convert to Islam. There was something in the letter about having 90 days to think about it. The 90 days expire on August 8. Then, Iran has stated that they will respond to the West’s proposals on their nuclear program on August 22.

Now, someone looked through and noted that August 22 corresponds to the end of the Islamic month and that there is something regarding this month and the supposed return of the 12th Imam. Ahmadinejad is well known to be a great believer in this prophecy and believes that the event is imminent. I believe he even gave a speech (maybe his UN speech) where he announced that it would happen within 2 years. Then, there was another speech he gave yesterday where he announced that there would be great rejoicing among the Muslim community very soon.

This has led some to speculate that the Iranians are planning something big. The 12th Imam is supposed to return in the midst of worldwide chaos and war. He will rally the Muslims to him and then proceed to conquer the world. I don’t believe the Iranians thought that Israel would respond in such an aggressive manner to their proxy Hezbollah’s actions and they are now backpedaling. The Iranians are probably trying very hard to move up the timetable of whatever it is they were planning in the first place. I would suspect that it might heavily involve Syria and possibly Jordan though.

Iran has a sizable and reasonably well-trained army, but their air force leaves something to be desired. If they tried to push through any part of Iraq towards Israel, they would meet a nasty obstacle in the US Army, even if it were caught flat-footed by the sudden launching of an invasion force. Plus, the shortest route would be through northern Iraq and the Kurds would play havoc with the Iranian supply lines, to say nothing of what the American Air Force would do. So, we can put things to bed regarding the Iranian army moving against Israel. They might come out and try and hit the US Army, but I think the bulk of their might would be used in supplies that they have funneled into Syria. Syria could try for a lightning strike with WMDs and a ground force. If Jordan got in, and I’m still not sure how they would do it without a coup-de-tat, that would put two conventional armies striking towards the center of Israel while the majority of Israel’s army was spread to the two wings of the country. This could force Israel into using non-conventional weapons and it would certainly trigger the chaos that Ahmadinejad desires, although I have my doubts about the appearance of the 12th Imam.

Either way, I suspect that Iran will be throwing a gas balloon on this fire in the next two to four weeks. Something to watch for.

References

Just a quick thought by me that I mentioned during our Bible study today. If you want a possibility as to where the current hostilities in Israel are leading, read Amos 1-2 and Isaiah 17. There might be a couple of other chapters that are relevant, but I think these cover the basics. Of course, I could be way off base and things get resolved nicely. But I've got something tickling the back of my brain on this one.

Just a hunch.

Two Fronts

Two down, two to go. This morning, Israeli troops crossed the border into Lebanon (or at least the part controlled by Hezbollah). At this point, Israel is now at war with two of her immediate four regional neighbors. Or if you would like to view it in historical Biblical terms: Israel is now at war with the Philistines and Tyre and Sidon.

Israel is currently not at war with anyone over in the West Bank, which is still nominally under the control of Fatah. However, Israeli forces are fairly concentrated there and only an invasion by Jordan would really ignite a conflict there and Jordan’s government is still pro-West (and therefore willing to ignore Israel at the moment).

Israel is also technically not a war with Syria yet. However, as Hezbollah receives the majority of its support from Syria (with weapons and support via Iran) it is probably only a matter of time before Syria feels compelled to declare war as well. That will be when the proverbial poop hits the fan. Unlike the terrorist organizations, Syria has a conventional army and air force. They also may have a large supply of chemical weapons, whether developed on their own or from Iraq, which could be loaded onto scud missiles (of which Syria has a lot).

Syria may bide her time a little bit to see how the incursion into Lebanon goes. Their first desire is to reclaim Lebanon as a territory, which they lost last year in the Cedar Revolution. Anything that allows them to reestablish themselves as a regional power will take priority first. I still believe that Syria believes they must act in a complete surprise attack with overwhelming firepower to even have a prayer of defeating Israel. I also believe that such an attack would fail and if Syria chose to use chemical weapons, Israel would respond by turning Damascus into a glass parking lot.

The storm clouds of war are getting darker and thicker.

Israel Realizes It's at War

For one brief moment, it appears that Israel has finally realized that they’ve been at war for the past several years. Yesterday, Israel invaded Gaza in response to a Palestinian raid into Israel that killed two soldiers and kidnapped a third (never mind the hundreds of homemade rockets that Hamas lobs into Israeli towns). Meanwhile, the Palestinians are crying foul for Israel finally acting like any sovereign nation would when they are attacked by a foreign power.

If a company from the Mexican Army drove over the border and killed national guardsmen in Arizona and took hostages back to Mexico and had fellow Mexican companies firing rockets into the adjoining towns in Arizona, I don’t image that the Federal government’s response would be to say everything is okay and let’s talk. It would probably be a race to see if a portion of the US Army or the rest of the Arizona National Guard invaded Mexico first. Given our previous experience with Mexico, I’m not sure we would stop until we had Mexico City at full surrender and then we would demand concessions (most likely Mexican territory).

Yet in all this, the rest of the world acts as though Israel is the warmonger and the Palestinians are these weak, helpless individuals that never did anything wrong. Its very sad and also very insulting to treat an adult population that is fully capable of making its own decisions like two-year olds. The Palestinian people, fully cognizant of their actions, elected a terrorist group to be their government and elements of that government have committed acts of war on a country that this same government refuses even the right to exist. Israel is fully justified in whatever force they chose to use to get their soldier back.

In fact, I fully believe that there will be a time in the near future where the light bulb will go on in the minds of the Israelis and when they go to war again, they will not stop with attacking Hamas elements. They will not even stop with occupying Gaza and Judah. They will physically expel the Palestinians, forcing them out to Iran, Egypt, Iraq, and any other country that will take them. Of course the world will scream about the barbarity of this act and anti-Semitism will reach a fever pitch around the world (even in havens like the US and Australia), forcing an even greater exodus of Jews to Israel. Of course, Israel will have all this new land to colonize, so they’ll have lots of room for the refugees.

Crisis is coming and it is coming by a people finally picking themselves off the mat and just saying “enough.”

Waiting for the End

I’ve been reading the Left Behind series lately. It’s actually been pretty good with a fairly well engaging plot. It’s a little preachy but I think that’s hard to avoid given the subject matter. I’m on the sixth book right now and I think I have a good chance of polishing that off by this weekend. But reading this series and some of the other things that I’ve noticed while reading my blogs amuse me with how much people are hoping/expecting for the end of man’s dominion of Earth.

Of course, Christians have been doing that for a long time, but it seems that the whole society has been even twitchier about it for nearly 15 years now. I would place the principle portion of blame on three distinct events. The first is the refounding of Israel in 1948. The second is the calculations of Bishop Usher, in which he calculated that God created the Earth in 4004 BC. The third is a book published by Hal Lindsey called The Late, Great Planet Earth that postulated that the rapture would occur in 1988. Obviously, Mr. Lindsey was incorrect, but that began stirring up a lot of things.

People began to note things like President Bush (the first) talking about a New World Order and an alliance of nations. The various religions of the world began having discussions with each other in the Council of Churches. New Age thought began hitting mainstream. People began to sit up and take notice of them and there was a natural Christian blowback.

I remember another book that was published discussing the possible end in 1994. Although, surprisingly, there was very little discussion about it in 1997, which would have been the actual year 6000 if Bishop Usher’s chronology had been correct. Then there was all the hype around the year 2000, plus the recent publishing of both the Left Behind series and Joel Rosenberg’s Ezekiel series (Rosenberg has interesting insight, but his narrative style is a bit tedious for me).

As I have stated in earlier posts, I think additional events happening in Israel and around other areas of the Middle East are going to continue to feed into this trend and End Times predictions. There might even be a non-Christian tie in, as we get closer to the end of 2012 (which is where the Mayan calendar stops). But, in the end, I think all these events will pass and nothing will happen. I personally believe that the rapture and the return of Christ is still quite a few years away and that everything will happen when people are least expecting it. Not that I wouldn’t mind being wrong, but quite frankly, there is too much in the Bible talking about how things will happen when we are least expecting it (and least prepared for it).

Ohio Confusion

I recently read a post on Real Clear Politics that accused RFK Jr. of reviving the Democratic shriek of how Ohio was stolen in 2004 to discredit Ken Blackwell, who is now running for Governor. If this truly is what was on RFK Jr.'s mind, or any other outside Democratic operatives mind, they are the most stupid people on the face of this Earth.

Anyone who has spent any time in the this state for the past few years knows that the group of Republicans who control the top offices in the state are a group of lazy fat cats, who swap jobs every four years with each other to avoid the appearance of individual kingdoms. Then, on top of that, the current Republican governor (Bob Taft) is the least liked governor in the entire country (polling between 12 -20% approval). Taft is corrupt and the reek of scandal has tainted all those around him. All Ted Strickland needs to do to defeat Blackwell is keep his mouth shut (except to remind people of the corruption in Columbus) and breathe.

Yet, we see the possibility of the DNC coming in and screwing things up by reviving the "we was robbed" hysteria. Why? The prevailing theory is that its because Ken Blackwell is black and that he might peel off enough of the 90% African-American voters who normally vote Democratic to push him over the top and make further GOP inroads into the African-American community. Except that it won't happen and if Democrats continue to think in this racial manner, rather than appreciate the ability of the voters to think for themselves, they will start losing their block voters. Mr. Blackwell is extremely conservative and I highly doubt that any of his ideas will play well in the African-American community.

So the 90% is safe, assuming the Democrats don't push them into a state of disgust with them that they just stay at home. Discression is the better part of valor. Sometimes the donkeys need that whispered in their ears from time to time.

Baby's Here

I know blogging has been light, but its been a wreck at work and now the baby is here. She was born at 1:24 pm on May 11, 2006. She was 20.75 inches long and 8lb 8.8 oz. For those close to us who would like to see a picture, go here and enter the pertinant information. I'll try to keep everyone abreast of the situation, but these will be some long nights. :)

Anti-Illegal Elections

Well, its election time here in Ohio. We have no non-partisan issues, so Mrs. X will be staying home today (she’s still pregnant by the way). I am a registered Republican so I’ll be voting in the primary when I get off work. Most of the races are pretty cut and dry. We’ve got a couple of local races where I’m still tossing one candidate vs. the other. The big one is the governor’s race: Blackwell vs. Petrio for the Republican ticket. Blackwell is polling ahead of Petrio and Petrio’s last campaign ad reeked of desperation so it probably doesn’t really matter whom I vote for. Blackwell will win the nomination and be down anywhere from 7 to 15 points to Ted Strickland five months out.

Meanwhile, ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), a socialist workers group, organized a large protest with immigrants and has probably done more to hang them out to dry than any other event. Reading a few blogs from San Diego and Los Angeles, where the boycott had the widest participation, there seemed to be very little overall impact to businesses. Some inconveniences were reported, but nothing ground to a halt.

However, some snooping around to businesses that had significant percentages of people not showing up for work showed that the managers were not overly concerned. In fact, most responded that they would be firing a number of those who did not come in. Sadly, there is a feeling that you can just plug and chug. Someone who is more appreciative of the job can replace anyone who isn’t working out.

Worse for the immigrants than just the loss of their jobs is the public perception that has no entered in the thought process of most Americans. The winds were starting to blow against illegals, especially after many of them began demanding amnesty and reward for flouting the laws of this country. The biggest outcry has come from people who recently entered this country legally and have been going through the heavy bureaucratic red tape trying to get what these other folks are demanding to get easily. They have not helped their case by including members of fringe groups who go around waving Mexican flags and demanding that California and Arizona be returned to Mexico. The image of the Mexican flag over an upside-down American flag still burns rather hot in some people’s minds.

The boycott also called up what some will use as a powerful anti-illegal statistic. Los Angeles Public Schools reported approximately 25% absenteeism yesterday. Some of that were probably kids taking advantage of the situation even if they are not children of illegals. But throw in those children of illegals who did show up and 25% is probably a reasonably accurate number of the children of illegals (whether the children are citizens or not) who are in the school system of LA. The education budget for LA is approximately $13 billion. This means that anti-illegal groups are going to be talking about the over $3 billion that are spend educating the children of illegals in LA alone. If that statistic gets out to Joe and Jane six-pack of the mid-West and the South, guess what kind of hammer is going to be brought down on the local school boards?

Thus, by marching and attempting to demonstrate their power, power that is predominately an illusion due to the servitude that most are held in through fear, many illegal (and even non-illegal) immigrants are going to have some very hard times ahead. Arizona is already drafting legislation to create serious punishment and border enforcement for immigrants. The Democratic governor has promised to veto it, but the Republican congress is also crafting a ballot initiative to perform an end-around around that.

There have also been whispers that the minutemen or some other anti-illegal immigration group may field a third party candidate to get their concerns heard. When polled in Arizona, New Mexico, and other border states, a hypothetical third party candidate running on this issue does as well as a theoretical Democratic candidate and cuts deeply into the Republican base. Its an issue that cuts both ways and it’s not something that is going to go away anytime soon.

One Step Closer

This little bit of news caught my eye this morning. Of course, its glossed over with the typical tragedy of war and occupation, but it was the fact that the international community as well as the local officials that want to see the city rebuilt even beyond a simple archeological attraction. Still, I think its going to be a while before we can call this the Williamsburg of the Middle East ;)

If Iraq ever splits up, as I postulated in a previous post, look for Babylon to be declared the free city of the Middle East, especially once Jerusalem fully falls into Israeli hands.

Hollywood Fantasyland

Sorry for the long delay but I've been a bit out of the blogging mood. Plus, its been all baby, all the time in my mind and Mrs. X provides much better commentary on that than I do.

The West Wing has been referred to as “if Hollywood had run the Clinton White House.” Last night, Hollywood stepped in again and tried to claim that they were still in touch with the American electorate. To make a compelling storyline for this season’s election, they decided they needed to show a liberal Democratic candidate win the White House against a moderate conservative who was going to win California, thus proving that the country is more liberal and that a Democrat can win the White House without winning California.

Their plan for this involved a standard electoral map from the 2000 election with swaps in six key states: California, Texas, Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, and South Carolina. They also had this moderate Republican win Maine and Vermont but those electoral votes are small enough that it was only to make it more dramatic at the end.

That California and Texas would swap colors is possible, but rather unlikely. California has been receiving more and more liberal Easterners, inflating its population and driving it more to the left. Texas, meanwhile, hasn’t gone for a Democrat since it voted with the rest of the South for Jimmy Carter in 1976. But, Texans are definitely puffed up when it comes to native sons. A liberal candidate from Texas has a much better shot at winning the state than say a liberal from New England.

The idea that Santos could win Arizona and Colorado is tied into the mistaken idea of race block voting. Because African-Americans tend to vote 90% Democrat, there is this mistaken belief that Hispanics and other minority groups are this big voting block where if you convince one, you win them all. In fact, the two most recent elections showed that Hispanics especially are very nuanced and split along many different lines depending on what issues are important to them, much like many portions of white America. BTW, Colorado hasn’t gone Democrat since 1992.

Missouri has been a bellweather state for a long time. However, it has been trending more Republican over the last four years. In terms of the state of the country, a state like Ohio is a little more indicative of the mood of the country. Its fun to stick with trends so it’s easy to see why the writers gave Santos Missouri, however, in a real election, if Santos had won Missouri, he would have probably also won Ohio and Florida, ruining the storyline.

South Carolina is another non-sequitor. SC hasn’t voted Democrat since 1976, even when Bill Clinton won several states among the old Confederacy. Simply because a candidate visits a state many times during a campaign, that doesn’t mean you can necessarily reverse overlying trends. Again, if a Democratic candidate could carry a conservative state like South Carolina, they should nail states like Florida and Ohio, where the vote is much closer.

The producers of the show claim that up until John Spencer died, they were planning to have Vinick win the election. But when they were forced to write the death of Leo into the show, the writers decided that it would be too much of a downer if Santos lost his running mate and the election in one night. Actually, I think it would have been more real and would have given the show a biting edge that it once had back in the first four seasons. Your side doesn’t always win and those are the breaks. When it rains, it pours, etc. Of course, despite their claims, the way the show has laid itself out since the beginning of the season has presented a strong case that they were going to let Santos win from the beginning. So their explanation doesn’t exactly hold water in my mind.

I have no real problem with Santos winning, except for the fact that it seems so repetitive of Bartlett storylines. My only real problem is the manner in which it was done. The whole thing smacks of laziness on the part of the writers and only further exacerbates the cry of Mrs. X and myself, “Bring me the head of John Wells!”

Southern Straw Burning

This past weekend the Republican Southern Leadership Council held an informal straw poll among the various front-runners for the 2008 nomination. Most would not even take note of this except that Republican moneymen like to back front-runners early. Unlike Democrats, who are more willing to embrace an outsider, Republicans like to know whom they are voting and raising money for early. So this straw poll actually did a lot in lining up men with cash and making preparations for the jockeying that will take place next year.

Bill Frist, the Senate Majority leader from Tennessee, was the overall winner, but his victory is largely discounted. The event was held in Memphis and Frist is quite popular in his home state. However, he only received a few votes outside of the Tennessee delegation. What’s more, his leadership style has been almost completely lacking since Trent Lott was forced to resign. In any other state, Frist would probably consider himself luck to finish third. So, this doesn’t mean much overall, except that Frist might want to consider scrapping the Presidency and running for governor of Tennessee first.

The big surprise was who finished number two: Mitt Romney, governor of Massachusetts. It was widely expected that the number two slot would be a horserace between John McCain and John Warner (senator from Virginia). That someone not even from the south won the number two spot is potentially very big. Depending on how the increased scrutiny on his record as governor of Massachusetts goes, Romney could have just made a major step forward. Most of the Washington insiders want someone a bit more moderate that President Bush who will work a little better with the Democrats and won’t bring this emotional baggage to the table. What’s more, coming from a New England state, Romney could force a Democratic candidate to spend money to secure states they would normally win hands down. If Romney gets the nomination, he’ll have to select a southern conservative like Warner to fully placate the base and ensure a good turnout. Fortunately, being a Mormon, Romney shouldn’t have too much trouble getting the religious vote, despite the fact that conservative Christians and Mormons don’t always see eye to eye.

The other amusing story was the performance of John McCain. McCain seemed to sense early that he would get thumped in a race where he really needed to finish second. So he began going around and telling people to vote for Bush as a measure of solidarity. Some did and Bush finished fourth in a race that he can’t win, but most saw through this a ploy for McCain to disguise his poor showing. Even assuming that all those who voted for Bush would have voted for McCain, combining the two stacks would still have given McCain a third place finish and a fourth place finish is probably more accurate of his standing among the SRLC. What this shows is that McCain, while popular with the Beltway insiders and the media, is still not very popular with the base, despite his pandering. I don’t know what kind of deal McCain cut with Bush to get McCain to campaign for him, but McCain is going to need some serious help if he wants to be a factor in the primaries after Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

Now, much is still going on and I don’t know what’s going to happen in the next couple of years. For all we know, Mr. Cheney could have a fifth heart attack and be forced to resign for health reasons, prompting Mr. Bush to pluck someone from the masses and anoint them as a successor. But, I rather doubt that will happen. Still, this upcoming election is starting to take on more and more of a West Wing flavor.

IDIOT! Give me your money for this Crap!

So the Oscars were on last night. I didn’t really watch anything beyond Jon Stewart’s opening monologue, but I was in the other room and could hear a lot of it while Mrs. X watched it. However, she turned the TV off at 10 so I can’t say anything beyond that. In general of what I overheard, I was reminded of the scene from The Breakfast Club where Anthony Michael Hall’s character is spilling out about being unpopular and Molly Ringwald’s character says its because that they all look up to the popular kids (which include her and Emilio Estevez). Hollywood spend a good portion of last night slapping themselves on the back and chastising the public about not going to see the movies they make and slurping them for being on the cutting edge of culture.

There have been decidedly mixed reviews for Jon Stewart’s performance as host. I liked it, but it was easy to tell that the audience didn’t. Actors want to be lauded, not made fun of. Except that that’s what Jon Stewart does. But then again, with the trouble Hollywood has had in the past in getting people to host the show, its not surprising that they turned to Stewart. Maybe they thought it would make them hip or something.

No matter what you thought of Stewart’s performance, it was easily overshadowed by the almost palpable anger/irritation displayed by the Hollywood elite towards the unwashed masses for not recognizing them as the vanguard of culture and for giving them lots of money to see movies in a theater. There were at least two very snide comments about how nothing compares to seeing a movie in the theater and how we shouldn’t be buying DVDs because it doesn’t compare to a real movie experience. Actually, the last two movies I saw in the theater were Goblet of Fire and The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe. At Goblet of Fire, I nearly passed out from heat stroke, the theater was so packed and overheated and Mrs. X was almost reduced to tears she was in so much pain from sitting in the seats and being crowded by so many people. At Narnia, the aspect ratio of the movie was off so that any character’s head that was near the top of the screen was cut off at the nose. Neither of these is what I would call a truly enjoyable experience. Certainly not one that encourages me to go out and spend $9 on a random movie that may or not interest me.

The other thing that got me was the endless montages of how great Hollywood is. I made the snide remark to Mrs. X that if Hollywood could actually make a move as good as Ben Hur again, maybe people would actually go see them and they wouldn’t have to spend all this time and money yelling at people to remember how good they were and to try and get them to see a bunch of bad movies now.

One can only hope that the laws of capitalism eventually sink in to the Hollywood types and that if they make a good product, people will actually take part of that product. If not, the Oscars are only going to get worse in they’re living in the past and anger towards the masses.

Resurrection of Al?

In an article that appeared on The Hill, it appears that Al Gore might be ready to make a Nixon like run at the White House. In 1960, John Kennedy narrowly defeated Richard Nixon in a controversial election. Nixon was exiled where he became even more of a joke after being defeated in his run for Governor of California in 1962. However, after the more conservative Barry Goldwater was destroyed by LBJ in 1964, Republicans started having second thoughts about Nixon. Nixon, in turn, started glad-handing the party faithful, positioning himself for a run at the nomination in 1968. He locked it up and then narrowly defeated Hubert Humphrey in the 1968 election.

This could be a potential mirror for Al Gore in 2008. Gore was narrowly defeated in the 2000 election that had its share of controversy. Bush was blamed, but Gore received a great deal of scorn as well for not putting things out of reach by either winning Tennessee or New Hampshire. Gore was exiled to the political wilderness and was even see as the kiss of death after he endorsed Howard Dean in 2004 and Dean suddenly collapsed. But the more liberal John Kerry’s worse-than-Gore defeat to Bush kept shifting more of the 2000 election anger on Bush and the Democratic establishment rather than on Gore himself.

Gore has also been endearing himself more and more to the moveon.org portion of the Democratic base with his consistent attacks on Bush policies and complete opposition to the war in Iraq. In addition, Gore’s consistent position on global warming and energy policy are a bit more in favor following the aftereffects of Hurricane Katrina and the gas price spikes of last year.

With these as tools, as well as a couple of political favors that Howard Dean still owes him, Gore might be able to score a win in Iowa and a first or second finish in New Hampshire. This might be able to give him traction and generate more money to his campaign. Senator Clinton is already on the outs with the more liberal base because of her mixed position on the war and there are growing fears that she might not be electable. If Gore out-greens her, he might steal enough of her support in the party machinery to overcome the neck-and-neck race he’ll have to deal with from Mark Warner (former governor of Virginia). This is where the mood of the party will come into play as to see if they’ll be ready to embrace a more moderate candidate in the mold of former President Clinton.

Now, could Gore win the election? I doubt it. He’s made himself too extreme with his cries in the wilderness and all those SNL caricatures are hard to overcome. I’m also not completely sure that Gore could beat Warner in a head-to-head match up. But, if he does defeat Warner, he might be able to capture enough momentum to seize the middle and take out the Republican candidate, especially if the nominee is a hard righter like Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan). Still, I’d keep an eye on Al in the near future.

Iraq Dissolved?

Mrs. X, her mom, and I have had several discussions regarding the recent war in Iraq. Generally, Mrs. X’s mom is a little more conservative, but in this she is quite of the mind that an Iraqi civil war is inevitable and that we should just leave now and let them get it over with. I’m not ready to buy into complete civil war such as we had, but I think I will honestly be surprised if I look at a map in 10 years and see a country labeled Iraq and looking like it is now.

In the north, you have a region that is completely controlled by the Kurds and has functioned as an autonomous region ever since the first Iraq war back in 1991. They have an independent state in all but name and between 80 and 90 percent of the population favor having an independent state of Kurdistan rather than staying with Iraq.

On the southern side, there is a strong presence of Shia Muslims who probably wouldn’t have too much of a problem being absorbed into the Iranian state. Some of the intelligencia wouldn’t care for this, but they might be outnumbered by the masses. The Sunnis are primarily in the western section of the country and could unite with Jordan and Syria.

The problem with the simple breakup idea though is the upcoming war between Israel and its Arab neighbors. I’ve talked before about how Israel might be invaded on three sides by various Arab factions. Iran might even get involved by attacking US positions in Iraq and keeping us pinned down long enough for the western Arabs to significantly weaken Israel. Its unknown as to how the Shia Iraqis would respond to an invasion like this, whether they would join the Iranians in attacking us or they would resist the invasion. The Kurds would back us as well as Israel as they have strong ties to both countries, but I could also see them using this war to completely entrench themselves in the city of Kirkuk, which they are steadily trying to get back from the Arabs. The Sunnis meanwhile would support the Arab invasion of Israel and try to grab their own base of power as well.

So what’s the outcome? It depends on how strong Israel decides to push back. If they just expel the invaders, things might return to a status quo with a low level civil war now going on in Iraq. But if Israel pushes back as hard as they should have in 1967, things will be very different. Israel would completely expel the Arabs from Gaza and take over the entire West Bank. They might even seize land in Syria and Jordan to create a buffer zone between Israel and any foreign invader. Kurdistan would recognize the expanded state and form a trading alliance with Israel, forming a territorial border and trading highway through land formally possessed by Syria. With this new alliance, the two would unite and be strong enough to refute any advance from Turkey, which is not partial towards the Kurds. Depending on how quickly the Iranians were pushed back, territorial concessions might be made there, although the status quo might be maintained. Eventually, some of the mostly Shia areas of Iraq might defect to Iran, but that’s still very iffy. But Iraq itself would probably be dissolved into several minor states, including a southern Shia zone and a central Sunni zone. The middle region where Baghdad currently is might be declared a free zone, monitored and maintained by the international community, leading to a possible reconstruction of the city of Babylon as a free city of the future for which the leaders of the world might hammer out any problems.

Extreme possibility? Perhaps. Possible? Certainly. We’ll see what happens in a couple of years.

Dancing with the Press

Sometimes the press can just get very annoying. We’ve all been quite amused by the story that has come out this week about Mr. Cheney accidentally shooting one of his hunting companions. The man unfortunately suffered a relapse when one of the small pieces of shot triggered a mild heart attack. I think we will all admit that this is a tragedy and just another example for those of us who don’t care for guns as to why to avoid using them.

However, I think most reasonable people would also agree that either Mr. Cheney or the White House Press Secretary (Scott McClellan) deciding not to inform the Washington Press Corp immediately does not equate to the withholding of the Nixon tapes. In fact, the press was notified very soon after the incident, the local Corpus Christi press. Now, the Washington Press Corp is throwing a very public temper tantrum about being scooped by the small town folks in Corpus Christi. In fact, there apparently was an incident prior to the cameras being turned on in one of the press briefings where the NBC correspondent asked a question about why the Vice President’s office hadn’t informed the press immediately after the incident. Mr. McClellan told the reporter to wait until the cameras were on, but also implied that he would tell the reporter to direct that question to the Vice President’s office. The NBC correspondent apparently got very angry and started yelling at Mr. McClellan, accusing him of being a jerk and withholding information. If this were a young child, I think most people would have taken this person over their knee and given him a good spanking or at least a time out.

Unfortunately, because the old guard media no longer has complete control over the story, they are losing market share and that in turn makes them more whiney, pompous, and under the delusion of privilege than ever before. In my profession, if someone new comes along and starts doing my job in a way that my bosses prefer more to mine, then it is up to me to find out what my bosses want and improve my performance to suit their desires since they are the ones that pay my salary. This concept of the Washington Press Corp needing to be the only ones who disseminate any information regarding political figures is just annoying and very tiresome.

On a lighter note, we are now the semi-finals of Dancing With the Stars. Given the way the marks have been going, I expect Drew and Stacy to lead the pack with Lisa coming in right behind in third and Jerry finishing fourth with the judges. However, because of the fan vote, Lisa will go home. In the finals, I suspect that the producers will encourage the judges to give Drew and Stacy tying first place scores, with Jerry rounding out the bottom. Thus, when the fan vote is tabulated, Jerry won’t be able to sneak in for the win. Let me elaborate:

Mrs. X and I think that the scoring is as follows: the scores from the judges determine the ranking order. In the finals, the top couple would receive 3 points, the second 2 and the last 1. Then the fan vote comes in. The top couple in the fan voting receives 3 points, next 2 and the last 1. Then the points are added together. Let’s say that in the finals, Drew receives the top score from the judges, Stacy is second, and Jerry is last. But, in the fan voting, their numbers are reversed: Jerry –1, Stacy – 2, and Drew – 3. Added together, all three couples would have 4 points, but fan voting breaks the tie and Jerry Rice would win the crown. But, if Stacy and Drew tie for first, each would receive 3 points while Jerry gets 1. Thus, even if Jerry gets the top spot in the fan vote, one of the two remaining would get 5 total points to top Jerry. Plus, the fans would feel reasonably mollified because it was their voting that decided which of the two top contenders would win and the show would avoid the cries of “foul” that marred last year’s show. I’m sure the fan vote has been reasonably consistent that the producers already know who is going to win and have only had to do a marginal amount of manipulation. My gut tells me that Stacy is who is going to win, because nothing ever beats sex appeal when it comes to marketing.

Tppppppth!

To quote Bart Simpson, “I didn’t think it was possible, but this both sucks and blows.” Not only did Pittsburgh win a thoroughly non-entertaining Super Bowl, but the commercials pretty much stunk as well. All in all, I would say that there were about three good commercials. My rating would go as follows:

1) Fed Ex: Caveman – This one started out slow but the caveman getting chewed out by his boss for not using a service that hasn’t been invented yet and then getting squashed really amused me. Some good ultimate bad day humor.
2) Bud Light: Magic Fridge – Again, a slow start but an amusing pay off at the end. Skater guys bowing down to the magic fridge is always good.
3) Dove: Pretty Girls – Not funny, but something that needs to be recognized as to just how bad the problem has gotten with young women and their image of themselves, especially when there is nothing wrong with them. In some cases the opposite is true. But it was a good message and subtly played.

Some honorable mentions would go to the Budweiser Colt, the Kermit Hybrid, and the “I’m going to Disneyworld” commercials. Not the best, but at least mildly entertaining. In this group you could also add the Benny Hill Moto and the Monkey/Jackass commercials, but I thought both those premises were a bit tired.

The Diet Pepsi “brown and bubbly” was just bad but I rather dislike inanimate objects acting like people commercials. The first Hybrid commercial made no sense to me and I can’t recall any of the other commercials off the top of my head. Obviously they failed to garner my attention for memory. So I don’t believe we’ll be adding any of the commercials to the best list, which is still way too tilted towards that overly sappy “Mean Joe Greene” commercial.

As far as the game goes, I thought it was pretty bad. Pittsburgh had a grand total of three good plays that allowed them to score their 21 points. Seattle was in position for several good plays but the refs or the Seahawks themselves ended up screwing things up. As far as the pass interference call in the first quarter that negated a touchdown, I thought it was technically right, but the fact that the back judge didn’t call it until the Pittsburgh player complained made it something of a ticky-tack call. The holding call in the third quarter was a little more correct as I did see the arm bar. But I still thought the refs made themselves too obvious in this game, which is exactly what the NFL wanted to avoid. Any time you can look back on a game, and can say that a game changing moment was one that involved the refereeing of the game, its just not an entertaining or satisfying game. People want to talk about how either one team totally crushed the other or about how there was this one play that changed things (such as a last second field goal or a tackle at the 1 that saved a touchdown). Talking about officiating leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Now, Pittsburgh might have still won the game. They could have gone into the locker room down 14-7 and rallied to win 21-17. They certainly looked like they were getting things going a little better in the second half, even though they still didn’t do a whole lot.

Overall, I would say that this Super Bowl should be relegated to the scrap heap of history. People in Pittsburgh can enjoy it, but I can’t imagine anyone else wanting to watch highlights of this game in the future.

For Three Sins... Even for Four...

Things are going to go to hell for Israel very quickly this year. Yesterday we learned that Hamas has won a full majority of seats in the Palestinian parliament. Abu Mazen of Fatah is still the president, but it is Hamas that is going to be calling the shots now. News of the Hamas victory has had mixed reactions. In the West, there has been a mixture of horror and anxiety. In Arab countries, however, there has been a generally positive reaction. Iran, Egypt, Syria, and the Hezbollah elements in Lebanon have all greeted the news with jubilation. No word yet on the reaction from Jordan about this. Hamas itself is still reeling a bit from their win. I think they were unprepared for their own success and tried to even get Fatah to form the new government. Fatah declined so now Hamas is scrambling to figure out what to do. In the end, they will form a new government but probably will not back down from their objective to destroy Israel.

Now, couple this with the scheduled Israeli elections to be held in March. Also throw in that there may be something of a deadline for which to make surgical strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities in either March or April. Syria is also still very twitchy about possible American advances on their border and a population that is getting restless with the current regime. Throw all these things together and the fruit of war is starting to look more and more ripe. I’m sure most people believe that the Americans are too bogged down in Iraq to make any significant coordinated effort with Israel to repel a multiple pronged attack. Especially if Iran decides to activate its forces and engage us on the Iraq-Iran border and if Hamas can coordinate with the Al-Queda cells in Iraq to disrupt our supply lines. As a result Israel would be forced to deal with the guerrilla tactics of Hamas in the south, supplied with Egyptian weapons, and hold off the Syrian army from the north with aid from Hezbollah. The true wild card would be Jordan. If Jordan stays out of it, Israel can divide its army fairly effectively. If Jordan does enter the fight, Israel then has to fight it out on the mountains of Ephraim while fending off the Syrian armies and Hamas. Then you add the fact that Syria may have some WMDs (whether of their own development or having come from Iraq is unknown) and will probably not hesitate to use them.

So, are we looking at war in a couple of months? I doubt it. I think things will need to fester for a little while. Too much has happened too fast and I think the Arab states need a couple of months to catch their breath. I’m also not totally sure they will opt for the complete surprise attack that they did in 1973. They could and achieve great success through this, but I think they might want to try and make Israel look like the bad guy. This takes time. Still, I would be rather surprised if there is not some sort of armed conflict within 18 months of now. I think the Arabs would like to try and get some sort of ironic revenge by dealing Israel a deathblow around the 40th anniversary of the Six-Day War, which is easily Israel’s greatest military victory. Of course planning that blow and delivering it are two very different things. We shall see.

Coffee and Steel

When I was in college, the dorm cafeteria would set the Super Bowl Sunday meal based on which two teams were in the game. For example, my freshman year we had Green Bay vs. New England in Super Bowl XXXI. So for Green Bay, the cafeteria served brats that had been boiled in beer and sauerkraut. For New England, they served New England style clam chowder. People who know me would immediately tell you that I must have eaten the brats as soup and I don’t get along. Super Bowl XXXII had Green Bay and Denver, so while the brats came back, the adjoining meal was Denver omelets. I’d never heard of them either so I stuck with the brats. I don’t remember what was offered for Atlanta during Super Bowl XXXIII but I must have had it since the alternative was the Denver omelets again. My senior year it was St. Louis vs. Tennessee and I didn’t get to see the menu as I was attending a Super Bowl party and we just ordered pizza.

Reminiscing on all this made me think as to what you would offer to eat for the current Super Bowl contenders. For Seattle, I was thinking something along the lines of salmon, whether smoked or grilled. Of course you would have to supplement it with some flavored coffees, but that would be up to the individual. My problem is that I can’t quite think of anything good to represent Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh’s primary representation has always been steel and a very blue-collar city. A singular cuisine has not necessarily been their forte. So I forced to regress back to something like lunch-pail food such as subs. Nothing big like a pohboy, but more like a simple sub. If anyone can think of something more representative of Pittsburgh (Andy?) I’d be curious to hear.

As for the actual game, Mrs. X and I will be rooting for Seattle simply because it feels wrong to support a team from your own division that is a sworn enemy of the hometown boys. I also have ties to Seattle so it’ll be easier for me. However, I feel that our rooting will be in vain and that Pittsburgh will win the game. However, I’ve though lots of things about lots of teams this year and been very wrong many times. Mrs. X actually beat me in our pick ‘em by 12 games. When you throw in the fact that we only pick 5 games a week, it makes me look really bad. I actually finished the season below .500 (.482). So if I think Pittsburgh will win, maybe Seattle will prove me wrong. I certainly wouldn’t mind that.

Dating Easter

Yesterday, at church, the pastor gave a little sermon about reading and studying the Bible. He noted that in general, Southern Baptists rely more on direct Biblical teaching than church tradition than other denominations do (although we too suffer from the “upholding tradition” curse). This got me thinking about something that I read a couple of months ago and have given a lot of thought about: how errors creep into our celebration and understanding of things.

I’m not going to touch on Christmas, which has its own set of problems, but I specifically was thinking about Easter and the days in front of it. Tradition tells us that Jesus entered Jerusalem on Sunday, He was arrested Thursday night after celebrating the Passover with his disciples, He was tried and crucified on Friday and then he rose on Sunday. On the surface, it seems to be very straightforward, however, when you look at it deeper, a key flaw develops. Jesus promised His followers a key sign: the sign of Jonah.

Jonah was thrown off a ship for violating God’s will and spent three days and three nights in the belly of a fish before he repented and was returned to do the job God originally asked him to do. Jesus promised his followers that like Jonah, He would spend three days and three nights in the belly of the Earth before emerging alive again. Yet if we count out the way we celebrate things, the timeline doesn’t match up. Jesus is buried before sundown on Friday (1 day), Friday night (1 day, 1 night), Saturday passes (2 days, 2 nights), and then Jesus rises from the dead on Sunday. You might argue that if Jesus did not arise until after sunup, this would be three days, but it still fails the three days and three nights test.

So what is the answer? Jesus was crucified and was buried on Thursday. This allows Him to stay in the tomb for the full three days and three nights and then arise as the sun breaks on Sunday. Now, I can hear at least a couple of you crying out that the day after Jesus died was the Sabbath so he had to die on Friday. Not so. We must remember that Jesus was also crucified on Passover (Nisan 14). You must also remember that Jewish days begin at sundown so Nisan 14 actually began on Wednesday night and Nisan 15 began on Thursday night. The day after Passover is known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread and it was a holy day for the Jews. Thus it was to be treated in the same manner as a Sabbath no matter what day of the week it fell on. Much like how we celebrate Christmas on whatever day it falls on. It’s always December 25. Thus the Feast of Unleavened Bread is always on Nisan 15 and is to be treated special.

So what actually happened is this: Jesus enters Jerusalem to great acclaim on Nisan 10. He teaches for several days and then has a Passover meal with His disciples at the start of Nisan 14, which was Wednesday evening. That night He retreats to Gethsemane and is arrested. The Sanhedrin meets and convicts Him, handing Him over to Pilate early Thursday morning. Pilate gives in to the crowd and Jesus is crucified. He dies around 3 pm and is taken down shortly after. He is cleaned and buried in the tomb shortly before sundown. He stays there through both holy days and rises from the dead as the sun breaks early Sunday morning (Nisan 17). Thus, when we celebrate Maundy Thursday, we are celebrating His actual death rather than the Last Supper. Of course, I think we should tie the celebration in with Passover every year, but that’s my opinion.

Ten (or so) Worst Americans

Just recently, the BBC History magazine published a list of the 10 worst Britons in the past 1,000 years. The BBC refused to let history get shorted and selected 1 individual per century. The blog All Things Beautiful picked up on this concept and decided to create an American version. She has not posted hers yet but she has linked to a bunch of blogs who saw what she had in mind and decided to voice their own opinions. Because I’d rather not discuss the Bengals shameful performance of Saturday, I thought I would join the pack of lemmings and offer my own list.

In my list I’ve tried to remain as objective as possible, something that was completely lost on many of the blog posters. Most are filled with at least one or two very obvious political rants of our times. I’ve tried to give history an even say, but I must admit that my lack of intimate knowledge of the 19th century does bias this list towards the 20th. There are several people that I’ve seen pop up on other lists that I would give consideration to if I had room, such as Charles Manson and Aaron Burr, but I’ve tried to narrow the list to the worst of the worst, especially with either far reaching consequences or the sheer volume of their atrocities.

10) William Randolph Hearst – Most people would immediately question this selection. Yellow journalism certainly isn’t a good thing, but is it worth a position on this list? I believe it is. The process of creating a story from rumor or flat out lies directly led the US into war with Spain, costing a lot of American blood. It also cemented a point into the large newspaper barons that it didn’t really matter what the truth was. As long as they told a story convincingly enough, people would swallow it and the media could then dictate public policy. This ran through the entire 20th century from things like the two Red Scares, the Vietnam War, and even current attitudes about our government and its policies. Only recently with the proliferation of blogs and other sources have there been enough people digging to get all the information that people have been able to make decisions based on all the facts.

9) H. H. Holmes – Holmes was the first major American serial killer (at least that was caught). It is believed that he murdered over 200 people. His favorite method was through a hotel he ran in Chicago. He soundproofed certain rooms and would release gas into them during the night. He was a very sick individual and probably one of the most successful serial killers in the US.

8) Jane Fonda – Again, I am trying to leave politics out of this and leave the person’s actions to defend them. To many, Fonda remains a stanch anti-war activist and if that were the only thing she did, I wouldn’t even consider her for this list. However, she did not just oppose the government as many people did, she aided the enemy and was celebrated for it. Fonda set up foundations where people could donate money and have it be funneled to the North Vietnamese. She visited North Vietnam, inspecting and approving of equipment used against Americans. A famous story is told how she visited a POW camp and one soldier gave her a note with his information and asked that she give it to his family so that they may know where he was. She gave the note to a guard who then took the American prisoner away and was beaten. All wars have objectors and many wars have people working for the enemy, but Ms. Fonda has been celebrated and hailed as a hero for her actions that could and should have hanged less famous individuals. This celebration clouds the differences between opposition to combat (as practices by many law-abiding Americans during this time) and open support and aid to enemy (which is illegal under the Constitution). This confusion has had a disastrous effect on any practical debate where a person who opposes a war is called a traitor (see Michael Moore) and any person who supports a war is called a fascist war-monger (see Republican Party). This is why I believe Ms. Fonda’s actions push her above the fray and on to this list.

7) Jim Jones – Jones is probably the most famous of all the death cult leaders. Jones was a nut job of a preacher who created a massive following, swindling millions out of people. The government came after him and he transplanted himself and his church to Guyana. There, things went from bad to worse with beatings and rumored murders until he convinced his followers to die with him. 914 people died amidst one man’s madness, including 276 children, although Jones was found shot and not poisoned.

6) Julius and Ethel Rosenberg – There is much debate as to whether the Rosenbergs were Soviet spies prior to their delivering of nuclear secrets, but there is no doubt they did. In fairness, the Soviets had enough captured Germans that they would have figured it out eventually, but the material the Rosenbergs gave them certainly helped the case. Knowledge of nuclear weapons allowed the Soviets to rattle their saber just as loud as the Americans and also allowed them to be belligerent during the critical post-war clean up. At the very least, the Rosenbergs committed an act of high treason against the government and added fuel to a situation that eventually cost many American lives.

5) Eugene McCarthy – Despite what certain people’s convictions are about George W. Bush, it is McCarthy who pushed the US government to its closest embrace of dictatorship. McCarthy ruined many lives in his crowing and peacocking for the cameras. He trampled the rights of many Americans, most for certainly doing nothing more than holding opinions contrary to the mainstream. His creation of an atmosphere of fear and paranoia accelerated attacks not just on the cultural elite, but also in the masses. Modern versions of the Salem Witch Trials erupted throughout the country as anyone who uttered a leftist though could rightfully be charged with un-American activities and imprisoned. The specter of fear generated by McCarthy still lingers today, although we’ve changed the names from Communist to whatever the general bogeyman of the day is.

4) Franklin Pierce/James Buchanan – Both men are guilty of the same crime. Our 14th and 15th presidents were probably more responsible than just about anyone in history for allowing the events of the mid-19th century to descend into the Civil War. Pierce’s policies allowed direct confrontation between the two sides in Kansas. Any dialogue broke down and marauding bands on both sides attacked each other throughout the country. Buchanan came along and did nothing while he was in office, allowing things to further spiral out of control. The Civil War probably would have come at some point as the divisions were too great between the North and the South, however, the eight years over which these two men ruled were so full of incompetence and mismanagement that things were quickly brought to a head.

3) Jefferson Davis/Robert E. Lee – Davis is someone the Southerners will let me get by with, but a lot of people will get on me for attacking the patron saint of the South: Bobby Lee. No matter how good a commander or a man he was, he is still a traitor. People argue that he really wasn’t because he went with his “country” of Virginia. But Virginia was a member of the United States and Lee turned his back on it. Especially poignant is the fact that Lee was offered command of the Union armies and could have brought the Civil War to an end in less than a year. He might have been able to salvage the army that McDowell could not when things went array at First Manassas. But even beyond that, Lee and Davis were the two principles whom kept the war going as long as it did and continued to spill much innocent blood, to say nothing of keeping an entire race enslaved. The South’s beatification of Lee also obscures his role in history and trivializes the harm that he caused to the country. Even now, we may discuss openly the merits and faults of Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses Grant, but we may never dare breath that there might have been faults with Robert E. Lee and men like him.

2) Timothy McVey – Serial killers have come and gone, as have bizarre whack jobs. But no man has done more to murder fellow Americans and inspire fear than Timothy McVey. The mastermind and primary instrument of the Oklahoma City bombings McVey killed hundreds of people in a single moment, including many children. In my mind, no picture of that incident stands out more than of the firefighter holding the broken, bloodstained body of a child, maybe two years old. McVey never showed remorse or regret for his crime and the grand scale of his crime rifles him up to number 2 on this list.

1) Benedict Arnold – In the American lexicon, only two names are synonymous with treason: Judas and Benedict Arnold. Many people have committed treason and it is questionable to fully call it treason when one’s country is still more of an idea than a fact. However, the scale of what Arnold did is what propels him to the top. Benedict Arnold, prior to his treason was perhaps the greatest American hero at the time, second only to Washington. He captured Fort Ticonderoga; giving the Americans much needed heavy artillery. His delay tactics kept the British from advancing on New York in 1776 after the failed Quebec expedition. He almost single-handedly won the battle of Saratoga, destroying British hopes of reinforcement in the Northern colonies and convincing the French to enter the war on the American’s side. It has been said that if Arnold had died of his wounds that he received at Saratoga, he would be enshrined as one of the great heroes of America and we would sing psalms in his honor. Unfortunately, he turned for unknown reasons (although greed and love of a woman are the two most likely causes). The nature of his treason also damns him above all others. Arnold tried to give the British West Point. If he had succeeded, the British would have been in complete control of the Hudson River, allowing them to cut New England off from the other colonies and allowed the British to cut the Americans to pieces in smaller, easier portions. We well probably would have lost the war by 1782 or 1783 and the British would not have been generous when it came to dealing out terms and reparations. No man other than Arnold had such a means to destroy his country with a single stroke and for that reason we damn him as the worst American of all time.

You may disagree with my list and you are more than welcome to. My experiences and perceptions color my list as well as any other, but I’ve tried to be as objective as possible and hopefully you can see the merit of my argument if not fully agree with it.

Its a Girl

For those of you who read Mrs. X’s blog, this will not come as any surprise, but we are expecting a baby. It’s due on May 5 and, of course, we’ve been bombarded with jokes telling us to name it something like Margarita or Tequila.

Anyway, we had the ultrasound yesterday and we found out that we are going to have a girl. Mrs. X and I are quite excited by this as it almost everyone around us. Both of us had feeling that we were going to have a girl and there has been a lot of anticipation from other relatives about it being a girl as well. Of course, we would have been very happy if it was a boy, but it was cool to have that gut feeling validated.

The ultrasound was quite neat. We got almost the whole thing on tape and a couple of times you can see the baby squirming and kicking. She’s not quite big enough to feel just yet. Mrs. X has said that she thought she felt something a couple of times while lying still, but she’s unsure if it was the baby or just digestion of food or any other bodily movement. Technically we’re at 19 weeks, although I’m guessing the ultrasound will knock us back a week or so to 18 and we should be right on the cusp of Mrs. X being able to really feel the baby. We’ve got a little further to go before I’ll be able to feel anything.

We’ve not fully decided on names just yet. We’ve got the middle name pretty much locked in, but we’re debating on two major selections for first names but I imagine that we’ll be open to other names as well. But we’re going to wait until the baby is born before we announce the name. We’d like everyone to hear the name and immediately associate it with the baby rather than hear the name in the abstract and start thinking, “why did they choose that name?”

We got a couple of still pictures along with the video and I might play with it to see if I can get one of them scanned in to the computer. If it looks okay, I’ll see if I can post it.

Football Clarity

The BCS bowls are now set and things fell almost the way that was expected. Ironically, because of two upsets in the championship games, the BCS is controversy free this year. Georgia upsetting LSU and Florida St. upsetting Virginia Tech propelled Ohio St. up to #4 in the BCS standings and Notre Dame to #6 in the standings. Notre Dame lives by the same rules as the non-BCS conferences in that they become BCS eligible when their BCS ranking is #12 or better and they get an automatic berth if the ranking is #6 or better. Utah got to the Fiesta Bowl last year because of this rule. As such, Notre Dame automatically qualified and the other at large berth went to Ohio St. by virtue of the fact that the top 4 BCS teams are guaranteed a BCS bowl berth. Texas pulled this little trick on Cal last year and now Ohio St. did it to Oregon, who is ranked #5 in the BCS standings. So our big four bowl games are as follows:

Fiesta: Ohio St. vs Notre Dame
Orange: Florida St. vs Penn St.
Sugar: Georgia vs West Virginia
Rose: USC vs Texas

Ohio St. and Notre Dame will be a good match up. I lean towards Ohio St. in this match up, just because of their defense. Notre Dame still isn’t quite up to stopping good teams from scoring and if Ohio St. stops Brady Quinn at all, they should be able to get ahead.

The Orange is being renamed the geezer bowl as you have the two oldest (and most winningest coaches) playing against each other: Bowden is 76 while Paterno is 79. Florida St. will have a nice home crowd, but Penn St. is a much better team. Penn St. should cruise to a win and depending on what happens in the Rose Bowl, could finish the season ranked #2.

Georgia and West Virginia is probably going to be a closer match up than LSU W. Virginia would have been, but I’m still going to take the SEC team over the Big East team, especially since the Sugar Bowl will be played in Atlanta this year, giving Georgia a huge home field advantage.

USC vs. Texas is probably the hardest game to pick. On paper the two teams are almost identical in stats. Texas has more of a defense but USC gets a home field advantage playing in the Rose Bowl. At the moment I am leaning a little towards Texas because of the defense, although Texas’ lack of a big name running back is a cause for concern. It should be a good game though.

On the NFL side of things, people are quite happy around here. The Bengals defeated the Steelers in Pittsburgh and now have a two game advantage in the division. If they defeat the rival Browns next week, Cincinnati gains the tiebreaker with Pittsburgh and effectively will take a three game lead in the division with three games to play. That will all but lock up the #3 seed in the playoffs and leave a chance to gain the #2 seed and a first round bye. However, they will need help for that. Denver currently has the #2 seed by virtue of a better record against AFC opponents since both teams are now 9-3. The Bengals need Denver to drop another game for them to move up, which is unlikely in the face of Denver’s schedule for the rest of the season. Meanwhile, Indianapolis moved one step closer to securing home field advantage while San Diego moved into the #6 spot ahead of Kansas City and Pittsburgh. Jacksonville is in firm control of the #5 seed and will have the luxury of flying to New England for that first week of the playoffs.

On the NFC side, there was only a slight jostling. Seattle still holds the #1 seed, and will wrap up the division title if they defeat Philadelphia tonight. Chicago still holds its tenuous grip on the #2 seed despite the offense getting progressively worse. Any slip by Chicago will allow Carolina to move up from the #3 seed into the #2 spot. Also lurking nearby are the NY Giants who got into the driver’s seat of the NFC East and the #4 seed by beating Dallas. Tampa Bay and Dallas are the current #5 and #6 seeds with Atlanta and Minnesota lurking nearby. I expect some changing of the seedings before the playoffs, but the division winners are all but set in my mind. Some nasty fighting will occur for the two wild card spots before the end of the season though.