Joe Eszterhas: Crossbearer

For awhile, all anyone in Hollywood talked about was Joe Eszterhas. Depending on whom you talked to, he was either the most brilliant thing to happen to movies and screenwriting or he was responsible for much of the sleaze in the mid-1990s. Whatever the case, Eszterhas had an impressive resume. He left a journalism career with Rolling Stone in the 1970s to pursue screenwriting, which led to films like F.I.S.T., Flashdance, Jagged Edge, and a couple other little films like Basic Instinct and Showgirls -- which made him rich and famous and notorious and the whipping boy of culture warriors everywhere. Also he was known for being a chain-smoking, frequently drunk self-promoter with a foul mouth and an even fouler disposition. In a career retrospective, Slate's David Plotz described Eszterhas as having "devoted his career to the artful composition of smut and violence."

But other than a bestselling 2004 memoir called Hollywood Animal -- which was praised for its rawness but also reviled because in it he boasted about all the actresses he'd bedded and roasted the entertainment industry execs who'd crossed him -- he's been out of the public eye for nearly a decade.

We learned this year, though, that Eszterhas found Jesus. His faith is one in a long line of surprising conversions, starting with Saul of Tarsus and continuing on through Bob Dylan and, well, Stephen Baldwin and that guy from Korn, I guess. Suffering from throat cancer and having left L.A. to return to Cleveland, where he grew up, Eszterhas hit the end of his rope in 2001. He gave up smoking and drinking and (apparently) cussing, and returned to the Catholicism of his childhood. He's now a profoundly -- if unconventionally -- religious man, and this month saw the release of Crossbearer, his spiritual memoir about his conversion and the years that followed.

I haven't read it, although I listened to an interview with him on NPR and he seems pretty sincere about his faith. Others, though, have questioned the timeline of his conversion. He got religion in 2001 and turned away from his wicked ways -- to put it in evangelist-speak -- yet somehow still wrote a tell-all memoir in 2004 that was peppered with all the familiar seediness and sleaze for which Eszterhas was known. Hollywood Animal, to put it bluntly, wasn't a very Jesus-y book. (You can read some excerpts here, but be forewarned that you probably won't want to read it with your grandparents or children or Sunday School teacher looking over your shoulder.)

Anyway, there's not much point to this post except to say I love it when unconventional people end up pursuing or finding or surrendering to faith. It doesn't always make us comfortable -- wait, that guy's a Christian? -- and we're not always too pleased with the results. But if God could do great things with a mealy mouthed murderer like Moses or a murderous adulterer like David or a pretty much insane prophet like Ezekiel or a cowardly, impetuous disciple like Peter...well, surely he can use a naughty screenwriter like Joe Eszterhas. That's the beauty of grace.

If anything, the world of Christian film is gonna get a whole lot more exciting than Facing the Giants and Fireproof.

The Green Bible

On October 7, publisher HarperOne is taking a bold new step in Bible publishing: The Green Bible. It's an environmentally friendly Bible, in terms of its packaging -- 10% post-consumer recycled paper, soy-based ink, cotton binding -- but that's not really what makes it so groundbreaking.

The Green Bible's stated purpose is to "equip and encourage you to see God's vision for creation and help you engage in the work of healing and sustaining it." To accomplish that goal, it includes ecologically minded essays by Brian McLaren, N.T. Wright, Desmond Tutu, and Matthew Sleeth. No problem there. I like all those guys. But what's crazy and new about this Bible is that it takes the old idea of putting the words of Christ in red and tweaks it for environmental stewardship. In the Green Bible, every verse in reference to creation care and stewardship of the earth is printed in green ink. It's a green-letter Bible! (You can browse through its pages here.)

I personally think this is brilliant, and will kick off the next wave in niche Bible publishing. Some ideas:

1. The Orange Bible: Highlights all the verses about the fires, tortures, and other punishments of hell.

2. The Gold Bible: Highlights all the verses in which God makes it perfectly clear he wants you to be rich. And as long as we're doing something new and different, the four Gospels would be renamed "The Prosperity Gospel of Matthew" and "The Prosperity Gospel of Mark" and so on.

3. The Blue Bible: Highlights all the times the psalmists and other depressed prophets doubted God's presence or activity in their lives. This Bible would not sell nearly as well as the Gold Bible.

4. The Dark Red Bible: Highlights all the biblical verses depicting violence and bloodshed. This Bible would probably end up getting banned, though. You're not supposed to call attention to that stuff.

5. The Lavender Bible: Highlights all the verses involving promiscuity, fornication, and other sexual activity. This also would be banned, for the reasons stated above.

6. The Not-Pink Bible: Highlights the verses that proclaim the sinfulness of homosexuality.

7. The Secret Last Days Bible: Highlights, in invisible ink, all the verses that offer a coded blueprint for the End Times.

8. The Light-Green Bible: Highlights, in a perfectly lovely light shade of green, all the Bible verses mentioning cucumbers. (Unfortunately, there's only one: Isaiah 1:8 -- KJV)

Let me know if I've missed any.

My Week of Interviews

One of the coolest things about writing for magazines is that you inevitably get to talk to interesting people. Of course, it's mostly over the phone, but still...

Once I spoke to this guy for a do-it-yourself home improvement article I wrote for Christian Single. He was a hoot, as you might expect of a TV personality known as "Ed the Plumber."

Anyway, this week I've been interviewing a few folks for an upcoming article for Collide Magazine about humor and the Church (Collide is a newish church + media publication that's doing some great stuff.)

On Monday I talked to Dan Merchant, the writer/director/producer and star of the buzzworthy documentary "Lord, Save Us from Your Followers." A brilliant concept and film, by the way. If you haven't heard of it, go to the Lord, Save Us site and watch a few of the clips. Dan's accomplishments seriously impress me. He's written and produced shows for VH1. He's a novelist. He's written and sold screenplays. He even won a regional EMMY award for his work on "Bill Nye the Science Guy." Bill Nye!

Dan was gracious and funny and laughed a lot while we spoke. I'm now jealous of Matthew Paul Turner, who's going on tour with Dan next month, because it sounds like a lot of fun and because I possibly have a small man-crush on Dan. I'm thinking of ways I can cause MPT to get sick or sprain his voice or something, then I can swoop in as his last-minute replacement. If you have any ideas of how to accomplish this, let me know.

On Tuesday I spoke to Joel Kilpatrick, who has ghost-written a ton of books but is probably best-known for being the one-man show behind LarkNews.com (a satirical Christian news site in the completely straight and dead-on hilarious manner of The Onion), and the author of A Field Guide to Evangelicals and Their Habitat. Joel is quiet, unassuming, and frighteningly deadpan. It is not a secret that he writes the Lark, and I completely knew that I had the right guy, but the moment I asked him a question about Lark News there was dead silence on the phone. For an uncomfortably long time. Then he said, "Oh, you thought..." And some more silence.

Then, "Um, that's not — I'm sorry. (Heavy sigh.) That's the other Joel Kilpatrick."

I knew he was kidding me -- pretty much -- and managed to keep quiet while he stammered around and played up the fake awkwardness. But for a second there, I had a brief, horrible moment of uncertainty. Then he laughed it off and we went about our business. Well-played, Mr. Kilpatrick.

Yesterday I interviewed Jon Acuff, the blogger behind the explosively big Stuff Christians Like. Inspired by Christian Lander and Stuff White People Like, Jon started SCL to poke fun at what he calls the "clutter" of church culture (of which, as a pastor's kid, he's an admitted part). Jon knew about the books I've written, and asked me if -- as a published author -- I was wearing gold pants. Because all published authors are breathtakingly wealthy. Sadly, I was not. But now I think maybe I need to get some gold pants. Digital high-five for the idea, Jon.

More Photoshopping the Headlines

I'd forgotten about making "Crappy Illustrations of Timely Headlines" a regular series on the blog, until I saw this headline and immediately my imagination went to the wrong place:

North Korean Nuclear Plant Seals Removed (CNN.com)

Here's the quick-and-dirty Photoshop recreation of my immediate mental picture.

Headline: North Korean Nuclear Plant Seals Removed

Visual:



You're welcome.

Happy Padre Pio Day!

September 23 is the feast day for Padre Pio, one of the best-known saints of the 20th century. It's one thing to hear fantastic stories about saints of old who slew dragons (St. George) and got kidnapped by pirates (St. Patrick) and may or may not have had the head of a dog (St. Christopher). But that stuff happened centuries ago, so who can verify it?

But Padre Pio is recent. He did some of his saintly stuff less than half a century ago (he died in 1968 and was canonized in 2002). Some of it was even documented. As you feast in his honor today, here are some fun facts to remember about Francesco Forgione, the humble Capuchin friar from Pietrelcina, Italy:

1. Pio experienced the stigmata, miraculously appearing wounds in the hands and feet, said to represent the wounds of Christ. At various times, Pio claimed to experience an invisible case of the stigmata (the best kind of stigmata, in which his hands hurt pretty bad but aren't outwardly messy) and a real, bleeding case of it. There are a couple of famous pictures of him where you can actually see the blood. It's ickily convincing. Pio's stigmata first showed up in 1918, and the blood was said to have smelled like flowers. Some critics said it smelled suspiciously like cologne.

2. Pio bilocated, i.e. he could be in two places at once. This allowed him to visit the Holy Land and the United States without ever stepping foot out of Italy. Holiness has its conveniences.

3. Pio could fly. According to legend, he once protected the Nazi-occupied city of San Giovanni Rotundo from American bombers during World War II. The pilots were about to drop their bombs when a floating guy in a brown robe got in their way. They pulled the triggers, but the bombs wouldn't release. Thanks, Padre!

4. Satan himself kept tormenting Pio in bodily form. Only the devil didn't have a red leotard or pitchfork, but would show up as the Blessed Virgin. Or as St. Francis. Or even as a young, tempting, barely clothed dancing girl. Sometimes Pio and Lucifer-in-disguise even wrestled. One time, according to Pio, an evil spirit ripped Pio's shirt off and began beating him mercilessly. Such attacks were never fun, but they were much more tolerable when the dancing girls did the shirt-ripping. When it came at the hands of fake St. Francis, the experience was just kinda...awkward.

5. Pio had his detractors. Some thought he faked the stigmata. And abused church finances. And engaged in inappropriate behavior in the confession booth -- though in Pio's defense, he may have thought he was wrestling the devil disguised as a dancing girl. It's just like Paul talked about in Ephesians 6:12...Pio wrestled "not against flesh and blood" or, you know, nubile confessors, but against spirits and principalities and whatnot.

Wanna learn more about Padre Pio? Here's all you'll ever need to know.

Loopy Goodness

A friend of mine sent me a link to a hugely popular YouTube video of Theresa Andersson, who is musician from New Orleans who recorded all of her most recent album, Hummingbird, Go! in her kitchen. The video features a performance of one of the songs ("Na Na Na"), and shows how she uses real-time digital recording and looping to create a multi-textured song in which she "virtually" performs the whole song herself -- including instruments, percussion, background vocals, lead -- simultaneously. It's cool to watch.




Another artist who uses looping to great advantage (at least in live shows) is Trace Bundy, who does ninja-like things on an acoustic guitar. Trace is a brilliant guitarist who is sometimes hesitant to do too much looping, because people tend to then assume everything he does is digital trickery, when in fact it's not. He's just really really good. But here's what "really really good" looks like when it's combined with looping. (BTW, Trace is a friend of mine, and the week before this video was recorded Trace was practicing this song in my living room. So, clearly, I am awesome.)



Anyway, that's all. I wanted to post some audio of the sermon illustration I mentioned preparing for in the Christian Parody T-Shirts Rant, but there were some administrative issues that prevented it from being recorded. Maybe I'll just record myself ranting about it and put THAT on YouTube. If I do, I'll let you know.

No Cash for You, Opinionated Missionary

There's a fascinating and infuriating post at the Burnside Writers Blog about a husband-and-wife missionary team who are in the States trying to raise enough money to fund their next year of ministry in Bratislava, Slovakia, where they'll work with Trans World Radio. Only Mike and Heather Colleto have had a major setback in their fundraising efforts among their Christian friends and supporters.

Why? Because Heather described her political views on her Facebook page with a single word: Obamarama. Now she's learned her former supporters might be withholding their support because, based on her Obama preference, they're questioning her commitment to Christianity and assuming she's suddenly turned pro-choice and anti-family. As a result, the Colleto's fundraising efforts are lagging way, way behind.

I'm not going to comment much more on the situation because Jordan does a great job of it already at Burnside, other than to say this:

1. What's possibly happening to the Colleto family is, to put it delicately, pure crap.

2. A preference for Obama does not automatically mean you want to abort babies.

3. A Christian is a Christian because she is committed to Jesus, not to a political platform.

Honestly? This angers me more than stupid Christian t-shirts. Whether you care for Obama or not -- and I know quite a few of my readers absolutely do not -- go support Mike and Heather. Read their blog. Donate to their ministry. And do not let human political preferences uproot the work of the Gospel.

[H/T: David Sessions at Patrol]

This...And Also That

Miscellaneous Linkage:

1. I have a new article up at TrueU.org. It highlights three major things I did this summer and what I learned from them. One of those things totally should have been "Do Not Swim Among Dead Fish" but I decided it was too dramatic and cut it from the final draft.

2. My interwebs friend Ken Grant works at a technology company named Analtech, which really is the company's name and not a frat-boy joke. (Their tagline: It's a short "a" people. Grow up!) With a name like that, you have to be a good sport about marketing, and they are. They produce thin layer chromatography plates, accessories, and lab supplies. I have no idea what these are, except to say chromatography is some sort of cool technological thing you might see on CSI. Anyway, what do you do when you sell an obscure product and have a funny name? You produce a super-professional and beautifully shot -- but also fun -- viral video: "The Adventures of Ana L'Tech." It's clearly about your product, but in a completely non-threatening and self-deprecating way. Mostly it's about seeing how many subtle and not-so-subtle nods you can make to movies like Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I love this idea. Watch and enjoy. Extra points if, at the end of it, you can tell me what those chromatography plates do.



I'm not sure I'll ever be in the market for a thin layer chromatography plate. But if I ever am, I'm totally buying one from Analtech. Thanks, Ken. (That's his voice during the intermission, by the way.)

3. You know what's missing from your life? Skeleton-shaped silverware. Now you can eat salad while looking at authentic -- and shiny! -- reproductions of your bones. Finally!

You're welcome.

4. Inspired by the "Jesus Is My Friend" video posted here last week, my brother's new church-league flag football team is now named "Sonseed." I believe my work here is done.

Update (4:04 pm):
5. I just remembered...Today is September 19, the 11th anniversary of the death of Rich Mullins. Here's a blog post I wrote about Rich last year, for the 10th anniversary. It's probably the most-viewed post I've ever written.

A Rant: Christian Parody Shirts

Yesterday I immersed myself in the bizarre world of Christian parody t-shirts. You know the game: 1) take a well-known, mainstream, corporate logo... 2) tweak it by somehow changing the words so it's about Jesus...and 3) sell it to well-meaning Christians who want a cool shirt that looks like other cool shirts but is actually about God.

I was investigating these shirts for a sermon illustration -- I'm helping my pastor introduce a message about "Selling Christianity" with some funny stuff about the dumbness of Jesus Junk. But now I'm just annoyed. Annoyed enough to start making lists about parody t-shirts.

For instance...

The top four things that are wrong with Christian parody tees:

1) They are not cool.

2) They are borderline trademark infringement.

3) They are uncreative (parody is possibly the most efficient but least creative way to be funny).

4) Christians are supposed to be unlike the world. Not very, very similar to the world except for the part where we remove the "L" in "GOLD'S GYM" to make it about God.

Also...

Three possible reasons a person might wear a Christian parody shirt:

1) Evangelism. Let's say you wear this "Lost" parody shirt. You meet a guy on the subway. He glances at your shirt. He is a fan of the ABC series. He says, "Dude! I can't wait for the new season of 'Lost' to start. What did you think about the disappearing island thing? Freaky, right?"

And you say, "Oh, I don't really watch that show."

Then he says, "Then why are you wearing that shirt?"

Your heart starts racing as you recognize a possible soul-winning opportunity, so you say, "Look closer." So the guy does, and he sees the three crosses, and the little line that says "Someone Is Searching For You," and he's intrigued. He then replies, "Oh...interesting. Someone is searching for me? Who exactly IS searching for me? Please explain your shirt, because I am strangely moved by it."

That's the best case scenario, of course. Worst case scenario is he looks at you funny, mutters "dork" under his breath, and adds one more reason to his growing list of why Christians are weird.

2) Proclamations of Faith. Never mind that Jesus said the world would know we are Christians by our love. Like, you know, caring about people and doing good things for people. That takes work! I'd rather let people know I'm a believer by wearing a retroish t-shirt that kinda looks like it's about Mountain Dew but really says Jesus "Meant to Die." Because, best-case, people will see me wearing that shirt and think, "That dude loves Jesus and wants me to know about His love for me and plan for my life."

Or, worst-case: "That dude is so not as cool as he thinks with his fake Mountain Dew + Jesus shirt. Who wears a Mountain Dew shirt anyway?"

3) To Make People Think. The intent of a good parody shirt will catch the attention of its viewer and, by nature of its subtle twist on a familiar logo, cause that person to ponder the sinfulness of this world, the fallen nature of his soul, and the wonderful gospel of grace. Of course, bad parody shirts, like this one, just make you furrow your brow in confusion and dismay.

Seriously. "A Breadcrumb & Fish"? First of all, to make those words sound anything like the phonetic emphasis of Abercrombie & Fitch, you have to say it in a completely nonsensical, too-fast cadence: "a-breadcrumb and FISH." I can't say it without giggling because it sounds so stupid. Secondly, it wasn't a breadcrumb used when Jesus fed the 5,000. It was three loaves of bread. It's already a miracle, t-shirt-making person. You don't have to make it more miraculous by telling people Jesus fed the 5,000 with just a bread crumb. Also, who wears A&F t-shirts anymore? Didn't that brand jump the shark when LFO did that song about it?

This shirt is a spiritual failure all the way around.

/rant

(Disclaimer: When I was 16, I had a shirt that looked like a credit card on it. But instead of "American Express," it said "Heavenly Express." Pot? This is Kettle: You're black.)

Osenga + Tomlin

This is why I love superstar singer/songwriter Andy Osenga's blog:

[from the Sept. 8 entry:]

So here’s a good story… Months and months ago I had a song-writing session with a guy. I really liked the guy, we had a good time, but I didn’t feel we really got anything. Well, he took the thing that wasn’t really all together and finished it with another guy. That song went on that other guy’s record.

That other guy is Chris Tomlin and apparently the album is #4 on iTunes this week. I still haven’t heard the song.

Have you? Do you like it?

---------------

Good stuff, Andy O.

The song, by the way, is called "With Me." I haven't heard it either. But I'm pretty sure I will, someday, over and over again on K-LOVE.

If you're not a fan of Andy's work, you need to be. He's the lead guitarist for Caedmon's Call, but he's also a ridiculously good performer and songwriter on his own. Yesterday he released his free new EP, Letters to the Editor, Vol. 2, a collaborative songwriting experiment with his fans and online community. I haven't listened to it yet, but Vol. 1 was really cool. So go to Andy's website, download it, and be amazed by his skillz.

Because if it's good enough for Tomlin...

(For your edification, here's Part 1 and Part 2 of an interview I did last summer with Andy about Letters, Vol 1.)

14 Reasons I Like Obama (Part 2)

Here's Part 2 of my 14 reasons why I'm voting for Obama in November. You can scroll down to read Reasons 1-7.

#8: Obama recognizes that the key to reducing abortions isn't to repeal Roe v. Wade, but to work to increase education and contraception use and adoptions. I'm pro-life when it comes to abortion, but I think making abortion illegal will not reduce the number of aborted babies. That number will stay the same, only more potential mothers will die trying to end their own pregnancies in back rooms or on their own. When we say we're pro-life, does it apply only to the aborted babies? Are we willing to save them but lose the moms? Are we so pro-life that we'll personally adopt the unwanted babies that don't get aborted? I'm not hearing any Christians ask or answer those questions while they wave the "Repeal Roe vs. Wade" signs. I personally hate abortion, but I don't see making it illegal as something that's helpful at this point. The issue is way more complex than that. Don't change the law. Change the thinking. And continue working to reduce the number of abortions.

#9: Obama is smart. Way smarter than me. I don't want a president I could drink a beer with (as was often cited as a reason to vote for Bush). I don't want a regular person having the job of President, and I don't pretend that a regular person would be a good president. I personally would make a horrible president. No, I want a president who is smarter and much more capable than me, and Obama is definitely that. McCain is smarter than me, too. And considerably tougher. But every single time I hear Obama speak -- whether to a crowd or to a single reporter -- I am impressed by his logic and the complexity of his thoughts. Whether or not he's so intelligent he gets bogged down by uncertainties and contingencies remains to be seen, but we've seen what happens when a president goes with his "gut" rather than his intellect. It's not good.

#10: Obama is offering real, thoughtful solutions to the issues our country is dealing with, from economics and fuel dependency to terrorism. McCain, in picking Palin -- who wasn't his first choice by a long shot (she's on record as having disagreed with two of his main selling points: the surge and climate change) -- is pandering to the religious culture warriors, and putting their culture war front and center in his administration. And I'm a religious person with cultural concerns, but the biggest problem our country has these days isn't defending traditional marriage. We have much greater things to tackle. (And you know what? Two years ago, McCain would have said exactly the same thing.)

#11: Obama appeals to and practices unity, while the McCain campaign continues to move further along the line of divisiveness. (And further away from the bridge-building "maverick" McCain used to be.) It's been suggested that he's doing it only to get elected, and he'll move back to the center once he becomes president. I guess that's, um, a positive thing (eventually), but how much time will he have to spend repairing the damage? And what does it say about voters if we're OK with this?

#12: Obama is right about Afghanistan. He was originally against the Iraq War on the basis that we hadn't finished another war yet -- the one in Afghanistan with the intent to find Osama bin Laden. Seven years after 9/11, we still don't have bin Laden. That's incredible to me, the rough terrain of Afghanistan and Pakistan notwithstanding. I appreciate that Obama continues to say that we aren't doing enough to pressure Pakistan on this issue -- he's been saying this since last summer -- and I completely agree (see below). And since Obama first raised the issue and gave it traction, McCain has started talking about pursuing bin Laden "to the gates of hell." But he's only come around on this recently. Why did he wait seven years to make this a priority? Why wasn't it important to him before?

#13: Obama is increasingly right about foreign policy in general. First, I'll admit he was wrong about the surge, and that was a big wrong. But consider the other places he's been right. Not just about the question of whether we should have gone to war with Iraq in the first place, but about the need to shift troops to Afghanistan (way before Bush decided to do it); the need to take on Al-Qaeda in Pakistan even without Pakistan's approval (which McCain ridiculed as "naive" but which the Bush administration is now doing...will McCain now denounce Bush as "naive," too?); the need to develop a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq (which Bush is now discussing). People have questions about Obama's leadership and experience when it comes to foreign policy, but so far he's been right most of the time -- and the Bush administration is giving credence to this by slowly implementing the things he has suggested.

#14: Obama's energy plan to ween the U.S. off its dependence on foreign oil -- placing great emphasis on the development of alternative energy sources -- makes far more sense than the inexplicable "Drill, Baby, Drill" cries coming out of the McCain/Palin rallies. I'm not against offshore drilling, but I'm against drilling being the single most important answer to the question of energy dependence. It's not the solution, it is not going to solve our oil problem, and I don't want to focus on it to the point that we forget to pursue alternative energy sources. That's where the future is, and that's where our money and creativity need to be channeled. Granted, some look at drilling as a short-term solution while we pursue other answers, but it's hardly even short-term: even if we already had the refineries in place and started drilling right this moment, it would be years before the oil actually began to flow. And the resulting product would hardly decrease gas prices at all. If we're going to invest money in reducing our oil dependence, the place to spend the money is not on new wells, but on alternative energy. It's a long-term solution, it leads to more jobs, it's better for the environment, and it's by far the more thoughtful and revolutionary approach.

Here's the deal: Neither candidate is perfect, and Obama has definitely made some statements along the way that have disappointed me. But McCain has disappointed me at every turn. Other than his ad during the DNC, I haven't heard anything at all from his campaign that gives me a reason to vote for him.

Say what you will about his liberalness or classic Democrat platform, but Obama's politics represent for me a third way, not attached to traditionally blue or red ideologies but to what works in a practical sense. Of course, one time I thought the same about George Bush and his compassionate conservatism, which is why I voted for him in 2000. I was wrong. And about a year ago, I thought the same about John McCain, for whom I was once hoping to vote. Turns out I was wrong on that one, too.

So I could totally be wrong on Obama. We'll see. But at this point, he has my vote.

--------

Agree? Disagree? What are your reasons for or against?

14 Reasons I Like Obama (Part 1)

This will likely be a controversial post -- at least among my closest friends and family, most of whom are Republicans and McCain supporters -- but it's time for me to come entirely out of the closet as a supporter of Barack Obama's campaign for President. I am one of those young evangelicals who have been swayed by Obama. I've admired him for quite awhile -- in fact, back in early 2007 I looked briefly into buying a domain name to sell Obama t-shirts (sadly, barackthevote.com was already taken). So instead, I went with the Fake Band Shirts idea.

Anyway...I want to make it clear that I have always, always liked John McCain. I loved his maverick personae, especially his commitment to certain values to the point that he wasn't afraid to break with his party when he thought Republicans were on the wrong side of an issue. I appreciated his openness with the press and his commitment to "straight talk," which was a refreshing change on both sides of the aisle. Above all, I respected his commitment to our country. He was a prisoner of war. My granddad was a prisoner of war. Both suffered a lot for their country, and I would have been proud to have voted for him. I rooted for him in the primaries because there were no other Republicans in the race to whom I would legitimately have given my vote. I was happy when became the Republican frontrunner.

That was seven months ago. A lot has changed since then. McCain -- or at least his campaign -- has begun taking steps away from the honorable public figure I trusted and toward someone that represents the worst of Republican politics.

So I'm not voting for him. I'm voting for Obama. I tried to pinpiont exactly what I liked about Obama and came up with 14 reasons. I'll give you seven of them today and seven tomorrow. Feel free to comment, disagree, discuss as necessary.

#1: Obama made a conservative, safe, serious choice when given the chance to make his first executive and presidential decision -- the selection of a running mate. On the other hand, McCain capitulated to the evangelical religious right he's battled with for so many years (conservative Christians spent most of the last 12 months hating on him) and ended up picking someone hardly anyone knew about, and whom hardly anyone thinks is qualified to be president. Any time you pick a vice presidential nominee who doesn't give a press conference and can't appear in an interview for a couple weeks because she needs to learn enough about foreign policy not to sound completely ignorant on a national stage, well, it's safe to say you have probably not made a wise pick. I like Palin, and I'm sure she's a great mother. My own mother is a great mother, too, but -- no offense, Mom -- I don't think she's qualified to be president. When your presidential candidate is already in his 70s, has had a physically difficult life, and is a cancer survivor, these kinds of things absolutely matter.

#2: Obama has handled the political season with civility, coolness, and intelligence. McCain has slipped away from the high-minded, non-attack politics he used to practice and -- other than the congratulatory DNC ad, which was a nice touch -- he's been as nasty as a blend of Karl Rove and James Carville. In fact, even Karl Rove has said that McCain's attack ads "have gone a step too far," beyond truthfulness and civility. That's like Darth Vader saying you're getting a little too deep into the dark side of the force. (Yes, I know Obama has aired attack ads, too, but they don't come close to stooping to the level of McCain's.)

#3: Obama is hopeful. He sees the best days of the US as being ahead of us, not behind us. McCain seems more nostalgic, pessimistic, and negative about our future. I've always thought of McCain as a fiery but ultimately decent guy. But the recent tenure of his campaign -- the "lipstick on a pig thing," and the stupid ads about Obama and sex-ed for kindergarteners -- is convincing me otherwise. He's turned into a cynical, whatever-it-takes-to-win candidate, and he's losing the integrity he was once known for.

#4: Obama makes the U.S. look better in the world's eyes. This is so significant to me. Credit goes to Andrew Sullivan for first making this case in The Atlantic -- an article that kick-started my appreciation for Obama. Here's the thing: When the world looks at the U.S., what do they see? In most cases, they visualize the President. In our current situation, this president comes off as an agressive, arrogant, polarizing, not-very-smart, go-it-on-your-own, way-too-certain, reckless cowboy who justifies most of his bad decisions in religious language. No wonder the rest of the world in general and the Islamic world in particular don't like us. Obama puts a different face on the U.S. Yes, he's a Christian like Bush, but one with some understanding and history with secularism and even Islam. (No, he's not a secret radical Muslim. Shut up, please.) He's a bridge between races. He has a funny, non-Western name that wouldn't be too out of place in Pakistan or Iraq. (When our enemies look at us, the Great Satan, and see someone who looks more like them, and has a name like theirs, are they more or less willing to continue viewing him -- and his nation -- as their enemy?) Obama is thoughtful instead of myopic, complex instead of simple, and conflicted instead of certain. He would be, as Sullivan wrote, a "re-branding" of the United States. And based on conversations I've had with international, non-American friends, we desperately need to be re-branded.

#5: Obama is black. This is definitely controversial, but I like what it says about the U.S. that we could finally have a non-white president and first family, and I don't mind at all letting anyone know that his skin color influences my vote in a positive way. In 20 years, I'm not sure I would feel very good upon looking at my grandkids and telling them I had the chance to vote for America's first black president -- the first serious non-white presidential contender -- but I chose the old white guy instead. Some will argue that simply voting based on skin color is just as racist as anything else. If so, fine, I'll own up to it, because I wholeheartedly agree that it is not a colorblind choice. But I'll also argue that ours is not a colorblind society, and because of that it means something to have a serious African-American presidential candidate, and it means something to have a potential African-American first lady. It means something to have two little African-American girls in the White House. No, it won't solve racism, but it's a huge, huge step in the right direction. I'd feel ashamed to pass this first-in-my-lifetime opportunity.

#6: Obama has raised the level of political and intellectual dialog in this country. I appreciate that. He's not mean. He's not angry. Sure, he's had some major mistakes ("bitter rural folks" was a very bad choice of words, and "above my pay grade" was a total cop-out and a big disappointment), but at least the guy knows how to pronounce "nuclear." He gives thoughtful answers to complex questions without reducing everything to a soundbite. Sometimes this comes back to bite him -- the media prefers a soundbite politician -- but I love it.

#7: Obama is offering a new economic agenda. It's unproven, but it has possibility and the potential for immediate benefits. McCain is offering pretty much the Bush administration's take on economic issues like taxes, trade, and health care. Which very few people like. And which have already proven to not work, as evidenced by the last several months and particularly the news today. The post-Sept. 11 crash is not an excuse for the failed economy, by the way. After eight years, Bush has had plenty of time to turn the economy back around. If his and McCain's methods haven't worked so far, why are we still looking for them to work in the future? I'm firmly of the opinion that if one administration has proven to be a failure, then you bring in a different administration. And I'm not convinced that a McCain administration will differ much from a Bush administration. Period.

Reasons #8-14 will appear tomorrow, and will cover abortion, the environment, drilling, and other fun topics.

Feel free to agree or disagree in the comments. Only one request: We may differ politically, but that's no excuse to be mean. Keep it nice and civil.

Liars

Here's a fun but discouraging site: PolitiFact.com, which analyzes the statements and speeches and ads run by the presidential candidates to figure out who's stretching the truth the most.

The current breakdown is as follows:

------------

McCain Campaign

Barely True Claims: 11
Hardly True Claims: 8
Outright Lies: 3
Total fabrications so far? 22

------------

Obama Campaign

Barely True Claims: 8
Hardly True Claims: 4
Outright Lies: 0
Total fabrications so far? 12

------------

According to Farhad Manjoo at Slate, Obama needs to take a lesson from the Straight-Talk Express and start stretching the truth a little more if he wants to win.

Sigh.

This Is Why It's Generally Best...

...not to dance in church services. In the spirit of Sonseed, here's another dose of pure awesomeness.

(A tip: Make sure you watch all the way to around the 1:55 mark. Because that's when the serious poppin' and lockin' and breakin' starts. Breakdancing hasn't been this hot since Alfonso Ribeiro showed up on "Silver Spoons.")




[H/T: iMonk]

Apocalypse Watch: Large Hadron Collider

We narrowly avoided the apocalypse this morning, but we'll have plenty of additional opportunities to greet it in the months to come. Along the Swiss-French border, the world's biggest particle collider -- the Large Hadron Collider, a 17-mile ring of underground supermagnets that accelerate protons superfast -- got switched on today and ran a few tests.

Today's tests involved a single beam of protons. First they fired the beam clockwise. Then they fired it counterclockwise. Future tests will involve two proton beams, fired in different directions, and maybe they'll collide. And if they smash together? Scientists hope this will give them some insights into conditions similar to those at the time of the "Big Bang," when nothing gave way to something. What they're ultimately looking for is a hypothetical particle called the Higgs-Boson, thought to be the "God particle" -- the ultimate building block of the universe that gives mass to other particles.

Money quote, from project leader Lyn Evans after the first test works. "My first thought was relief...This is a machine of enormous complexity. Things can go wrong at any time. But this morning has been a great start."

Things. Can go wrong. At any time.

That's encouraging, because some noisy skeptics of the collider and its particle-smashing science experiments have some ideas about what kinds of things can go wrong. They involve the destruction of the entire universe. Or at least the end of the world as we know it. Here's how:

1. It could generate a black hole that could eat the earth. Actual real scientists -- and not just, say, writers of books called Pocket Guide to the Apocalypse -- think this could happen. And if you get sucked into a black hole, you die. So does everyone else. In a really fast but really fantastic manner.

2. It could accidentally create a runaway "strangelet." Strangelets are subatomic particles that no one knows very much about. What we do know is that they devour matter. Which we're made of. As I predictively described in on p. 146 of PGTTA, "...if a negatively charged strangelet happens to be created during a smash-up, it could potentially set off a chain reaction that literally consumes everything in its path....The relentless process of expanding nothingness continues until we're all strangelets. Everyone. Everything. As in, bye-bye universe as we know it."

Most of the people involved say there is a miniscule chance that the above can happen. Tiny. Subatomic even.

Which makes me feel a lot better.

Additional fun reading from a legit scientist: Might a Laboratory Experiment Destroy Planet Earth?

One More Tri

I competed in another triathlon this weekend. It was not nearly as enjoyable as my first one. Primarily because it involved the following:

1. Dead fish.

2. Kicks to the face.

3. Vomiting while swimming.

4. Vomiting while biking.

This is not a triathlon blog -- it's not a vomiting blog either (thank heavens) -- so if you want to read the whole inspiring Rudy-like story you can get the scoop at my family blog.

Katy Perry Update

This just in: Apparently girl-kisser Katy Perry's eternal destination has already been decided...and it's not looking too hot. Or, um, actually it's looking really hot. Brimstone may or may not be involved.

This according to Havens Corners Church in Blacklick, Ohio.

(H/T: The Boar's Head Tavern)

Jesus Is My Friend

Sometimes there are videos that require long introductions telling you why it's important that you watch. But sometimes there are videos that are perfectly self-justifying, and need no introduction or qualification due to their inherent awesomeness. This is one of those videos.




(H/T: Bryan Allain via Andy Osenga)

Zap!

Pit Bulls with Lipstick

You don't read my blog for political commentary -- of that I'm pretty certain -- but this has been a pretty political week, so I'm gonna cover Sarah Palin for a second.

My opinion of her has whiplashed at least three times over the last six days.

Friday, August 29: Her candidacy is announced. Wow, I think. The governor of Alaska is kinda pretty! Then I learn, along with everyone else, of her hard-nosed reform background, and her five kids (one of whom has special needs), and her views on guns and gays and the environment. It's a weird, unexpected, but possibly brilliant choice. She's got energy policy chops. She's unafraid of big business. She's as inexperienced as Obama but at least her experience includes a quick stint behind an executive desk. Could it be she's -- to use a way overused phrase -- a game-changer? This is gonna be an interesting election.

Then I leave town for the mountains of New Mexico and unplug from the news cycle.

Monday, September 1: I come back home, boot up the computer, and all anyone's talking about is Bristol Palin, who is 17 and several months pregnant (but engaged!). And there are rumors that Bristol herself might have been the mom of little Trig. A fake pregnancy?!? Good gravy. Now I'm annoyed. The McCain camp tosses a bone to the angry Hilary supporters by bringing a powerful woman onto the ticket -- maybe the disaffected feminists will switch sides and vote Republican -- but then all anyone is doing is talking about Palin's family and motherhood and other issues that I'm pretty sure feminists wish we could, for once, set aside for a serious politician. At least, just for a little bit. And then the news media seems to be finding things out about Palin faster than the McCain campaign. The most important executive decision he's made so far and it appears to have been hasty, improperly vetted, and flat-out dumb. And cynical. And wrong. And it totally deflates McCain's Obama-is-not-experienced-enough argument, which is pretty much the only legitimate weapon the campaign has been able to use against him.

Suddenly I'm disappointed by McCain. He just shot his own campaign in the foot.

Wednesday, September 3: Palin speaks at the RNC and, boy, does she bring down the house. She grabs the spotlight and doesn't let go. She gives a killer speech. She's pretty, but she's also...mean. Her speech is full of sarcasm and condescension hidden beneath a glossy smile. She says "community organizer" as if the job is equivalent to dealing crack. She attacks Obama relentlessly for being an empty celebrity -- all while receiving the biggest applause the convention has seen so far (and for someone no one had heard of a week ago). She makes fun of Michelle Obama. I'm almost surprised she doesn't tease the Obamas for only having two kids when they could have had five. Despite being so sneering, it's a powerful, tough debut on a national stage, and suddenly it seems again that McCain has made a good choice. No doubt she's great at giving speeches, she's far more charismatic than her party's nominee, and she can get away with being the attack dog for the ticket. I kinda like her...but am also a little afraid of her. Which, I guess, is exactly what McCain needed.

The upshot? I used to think this was going to be a blowout election, and that McCain had no chance. Two days ago, it was starting to really feel that way. Palin doesn't change my vote, but she's gonna make the next two months a whole lot more exciting.