Just A Reminder...

If you are receiving notice of this post through your feed monitoring service, you’re watching a feed that is no longer active!

Please go to the new Patrick’s Place here and sign up for the free email newsletter or set your feed service to the new address.

07-07-07

For those of you who visit “Patrick’s Place” via Bloglines or other feed readers, you’ll want to actually visit the site to see what’s new!

I hope you enjoy, and I hope you have a happy and lucky July 7th!

Top Priority

Al Gore, appearing Thursday on NBC’s Today show, refused to endorse any specific Democratic candidate for president.

The reason? Because none of them has placed the global warming crisis as his or her “top priority.”

“Some of them have made good, positive statements, but it's still treated as a side issue. I will predict for you that within the next 500 days that this issue will be the Number One issue on the agenda,” he said.

Can Gore possibly be that out of touch? If so, it’s a good thing that he hasn’t entered the presidential race. While I respect his determination to protect the environment, and his efforts to educate people about ways that they can slow global warming, I think he must be crazy if he expects global warming to become the number one issue.

Has he heard of the War in Iraq? Terrorism? Education? Immigration? Health Care? Social Security? Has he read a newspaper in the last five years?

There are so many issues, so many problems this country faces that I don’t think there can be a single issue that gets to advance to the top of the line. Unless, of course, you’re suffering from some kind of extreme tunnel vision.

Don’t get me wrong: I do believe that global warming is a real phenomenon, and I do think that we should do everything within reason to reduce our negative impact on the planet. But I also believe -- and there are facts to back this up -- that there are naturally-occurring cycles in our weather that the disaster scenarios global warming enthusiasts toss around cannot fully explain. As much as we impact Mother Nature, I think Mother Nature has a few tricks up her sleeve that we are powerless to do anything about.

That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t try to control what we can; but it also shouldn’t mean that we should ignore other problems to promote this one to the “top spot.”

I don’t know about anyone else, but I wouldn’t vote for someone who made global warming his or her “top” crisis.

iNtitled?

In the midst of the recent iPhone frenzy, a celebrity’s publicist learned that what it takes to get one of the popular gadgets is patience, not status.

The Los Angeles Times reported that Cher’s publicist lamented not being able to land one of Apple’s new phones for her legendary client.

“Doesn't winning Oscars, Grammys and Emmys entitle her to move to the front of the line?” she said.

Why should it? Cher’s various talents, it would seem, have already been rewarded. She already has received far more recognition than most of us “normal” folks will ever receive. How far must the “special treatment” go?

Random Observations on the Fourth

“I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people by the people, for the people, whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a Republic; a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States; a perfect Union, one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.

“I therefore believe it is my duty to my Country to love it; to support its Constitution; to obey its laws; to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies.”

I wonder how many people are familiar with this quotation. It is known as “The American’s Creed,” and was written in 1917 by William Tyler Page, a descendant of one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and of the 10th president, John Tyler.

The creed was written about a year after the United States entered World War I. The spirit of patriotism was popular. But the Great Depression was still eleven years away, the death of Franklin Roosevelt, arguably the most beloved president of the 20th century, wouldn’t happen for another 48 years. The shocking death of President Kennedy was still 56 in the future. And while there was a September 11th on the calendar that year, the day that changed what that particular date meant to history wouldn’t happen for 84 years.

Or, to put it another way, times were very different.

Note that I said different. Not necessarily better. There have always been problems, because there is never any possible outcome to a situation that will universally please everyone. There were plenty of people willing to speak up for their opinions back then, too.

But it seems to me -- and I may be wrong -- that back then, there wasn’t this apparent need to divide that we have today. Our current president has a lot to do with that, but he certainly didn’t invent the popularity of division, even if he has been quite successful at manipulating it to his advantage, and his party’s disadvantage.

The two most divisive people in the current presidential race are probably John McCain and Hillary Clinton. Is that a good thing? I’m not sure. Not all division is bad: at least, it can inspire genuine debate. Ironically, one of the most divisive groups at the moment is the Christian Right, which should want to unite at every opportunity.

Debate today isn’t about discussion. It’s about getting personal. Calling people names. Calling people uneducated. Calling people insensitive or uncaring. And there are few kinds of treatment that one can receive that can make them more insensitive and uncaring than the constant barrage many face today. It’s all about cause and effect.

The spirit of patriotism is still alive in this country, as it was back in 1917. But today’s patriotism is dependent on a series of conditions and codicils: we support the troops but not the war, we support the Constitution but not the interpretations applied to it, Religious freedom but not specific religions, Freedom of Speech but not the right to say anything freely.

Somehow, the optimistic writers of yesteryear that set out to unite as many people as possible in this country with pieces like “The American’s Creed” probably never imagined a culture as fractured as ours. If they did, they probably never imagined that such a condition would be the norm.

The question is, what must it take for people to set aside the anger, the hostility and the presumption and actually unite?

What’s a Hero?

I had dinner with a co-worker the other day and we were talking about the firefighter story and how the local media in general handled the reporting of the tragedy and the public’s reaction.

The topic eventually turned to the word hero, which has been used by virtually all of the local television and radio stations and newspapers to describe the nine firefighters who died and their colleagues.

Not everyone is happy about that, and a few have commented to us that firefighters shouldn’t be referred to as “heroes.” Their primary reasoning seems to be that firefighters choose to enter a burning structure, so they know they’re taking a potentially life-threatening risk from the moment they step inside. “They’re just doing their job,” some have said. “They did what they were supposed to do,” others have suggested.

Some have expressed frustration that these nine men are getting so much attention when each soldier who dies doesn’t get the same attention. To this, I would respond that each local community that loses a soldier does give that man or woman an appropriate amount of coverage, although the national media doesn’t spend a great deal of time profiling each soldier. At the same time, I’m not at all certain that the national media spent a lot of time profiling each of the nine firefighters.

What I saw was more along the lines of what we in the business refer to as a “situationer:” a story detailing what happened, what’s happening right this minute and what is likely to happen over the next few days. You can be sure that those of us who have anything to do with news in Charleston have spent time talking about each of the nine, their lives, and personal stories told by those close to the victims.

My colleague said that he agreed with the criticism that the word hero is overused in today’s society. I do as well. There are plenty of people who are referred to as “heroes” whom I think are undeserving of such a label. But I pointed out that this doesn’t mean that everyone who is labeled that way doesn’t deserve the honor.

Let’s take the example of the soldier. Let’s say that in one day, two soldiers die in Iraq. One of them dies from injuries when his vehicle crashes in a non-combat-related accident. The other dies while saving the life of a fellow soldier caught in a firefight. There are plenty of people who would label both men as “heroes” because of a romantic association with soldiers in general, who volunteer to fight as our country’s government deems necessary. But were both of these men really “heroes?” I tend to think that the second soldier, who died rescuing his comrade, is the only hero of the two.

Not that the first didn’t make a sacrifice while serving his country. And I mean no disrespect toward anyone who had died while on active duty. But to me, becoming a hero requires an action that is itself heroic. Just being somewhere doesn’t, in my mind, qualify.

(It is worth noting, incidentally, that some reports have indicated that the first few of the nine fallen Charleston firefighters entered the building to make sure no one was trapped inside, thereby qualifying, just by motive, for the title in my book. The remaining firefighters went in to save their brothers.)

What’s your take? What does it take for someone to be worthy of such a title?

Anchor Gets Angry

Lest you think that everyone who works in television news is thrilled at the very mention of Paris Hilton’s name, I introduce Mika Brzezinski, of MSNBC.

During the cable network’s Morning Joe program, she became more and more demonstrative about her distaste over Paris-related stories.

At different points during the show, as she was about to read the news capsule, she became increasingly impatient with a producer who kept placing Hilton’s release from prison as that morning’s lead story.

She tore up scripts, threatened to light them on fire (which would probably have had OSHA paying her a visit), and ultimately got up from the desk and dropped them in a paper shredder.

Was it grandstanding? Absolutely. Was it a carefully-choreographed publicity stunt? Not likely, from the camera work, particularly when she gets up and walks to the shredder: it is clear that they didn’t have cameras in place ready to follow her along by the delay in getting from one shot to another.

Here’s the video from YouTube if you haven’t already seen it:



Her point, as far as I’m concerned, is well-taken. There are far more important things to talk about.

But what do you think? How would you feel if you were watching your newscast of choice and an anchor did this?

iRant

This post has nothing to do with the iPhone, despite the headline: I just hate to break up a set.

This has to do with the heiress. Paris Hilton. Why would I bring up this tired subject? Ratings.

You see, everyone loves beating up on the media for making so many mentions of her. They say that she's not worthy of being covered as “breaking news.” (And I completely agree.)

They say that the media has no business giving her so much exposure. (And I agree.)

They say that no one really wants to hear about Paris, but that the media is just making too much out of it. I would like to agree, but then the ratings come in.

More than 3.2 Million viewers -- three times his normal audience -- tuned in to CNN’s Larry King Live Wednesday night for Paris Hilton’s first interview since her release from jail. It was Larry King’s biggest audience of the year.

Seriously: stop watching. The reason the media keeps Paris on the air is because the audience keeps sending the message that they want more of her. I was sick of Paris years ago. I flip the channel as soon as I see the first mention of her.

In a perfect world, the news would never focus on something as insignificant as her little legal drama. But this isn’t a perfect world. So you have to decide what you do and don’t want to see, then send that message. If you don’t like watching Paris Hilton, then don’t watch.

If the media could ever be persuaded that no one would tune in for the latest nugget of news about her, you can bet you’d never hear about her again.

iFarce

My best friend pointed me to this earlier today: after all the iHype over the iPhone, here’s a nice little iClip that iParodies a certain iPresident:

iDay!

People have been lined up for days waiting to be among the first to buy Apple’s iPhone, which officially goes on sale at 6:00pm tonight.

Rest assured that I am not one of them. While I like the look of the phone and am sure that the cool factor is through the roof when you actually use one, there are two reasons why the Mac-like gadget is not in my future.

First, there’s that little thing known as cost. The phone costs between $500 to $600. Is it worth it? Who knows: if you want everything it offers and can afford such a price, then it probably is. For the rest of us, that’s a steep price. (And Apple isn’t the kind of company that offers huge drops in price over time, either.)

And that’s only the beginning. The new AT&T -- so far, I prefer the old one -- wants a two-year committment with service running anywhere from $60 to $100 a month. What?

I recently had my cell phone number changed to a local number here in the Lowcountry. To change the number, Verizon automatically renewed my contract for two more years. I’m sure we’ll reach a point where a call to your cell phone carrier’s 411 service will increase the term of your contract by at least a year. The difference is that my phone was essentially free and that my monthly cost is about $49. That, to me, is entirely too high.

Then there is my second objection to such a device.

How much do you really need to do with a cell phone? Sure, mine has a little calendar/reminder function, which I use. It has a built-in digital camera, which I have used occasionally. It has text messaging, which I don’t use. It has email, which I wouldn’t think of trying to use on a cell phone. It has internet, which is annoying enough on a full-sized computer.

I’m one of those purists: I prefer to watch TV on a television, to make calls on a phone, and to handle surfing and email on a computer. Putting everything into one may be convenient, but I don’t think it’s necessary, especially for that high a price. And as we’ve all learned from Mr. Murphy, if something can go wrong, it will. With technology, if something can go wrong, it will in a big way!

Just imagine the possibilities.

I’m a Mac guy...always have been. Not because I think that PCs are so bad, but they aren’t as user-friendly. And just yesterday at work, the PC I was working on gave me the “blue screen of death.” My Mac doesn’t treat me that way.

But that doesn’t mean that I want everything in my life to act like a Mac. Or to cost what a Mac costs.

If you’re one of those lunatics enthusiasts who have been losing sleep until you can have an iPhone of your own, I wish you success today. You might need it.

The Nine

"Monday, June 18th is a day that our city will never forget. Never. We lost nine of the bravest men doing what they love to do best: fight fire. These guys were the best."

--Chief Rusty Thomas
City of Charleston Fire Department

After a long week of coverage, a long week of sitting in an edit bay watching those images over and over again, reminding me of what it was like the week after 9/11, I went to the scene of the deadly fire in West Ashley.

It was the first time I had been by what used to be the Sofa Superstore since the night of the fire itself, when a thick black column of smoke made me curious and let me to drive by the fire just twenty minutes or so after firefighters first arrived on the scene.

Since that terrible night, when nine firefighters were lost, the public has erected a makeshift memorial to the fallen heroes. Nine white crosses made of PVC piping line the sidewalk in front of the burned-out structure. American flags, flowers, photographs, cards, stuffed animals and toy fire engines are among the items that have been added throughout the week.

Traffic along Highway 17 slows to a crawl in this area, as motorists slow to view the display.

In a word, it is heartbreaking. I knew it would be. But after a week of seeing it on videotape, I needed to see it in person.

Mourners walk along the sidewalk, reading posters written by young and old. Among them are firefighters from around the country. They came here Friday for the public memorial service. That morning, a procession of more than 300 fire trucks and first response vehicles made their way from downtown Charleston, past this scene, to the North Charleston Coliseum, where more than 20,000 people attended.

Some of those firefighters are still in town, not ready to leave just yet. Perhaps this was their final goodbye; maybe they needed to come here one more time.

I tried a couple of times to say something to them, but as I tried to come up with something -- anything -- that seemed like it might be remotely comforting, emotion got the better of me, and I knew I'd never be able to get a word out.

It seemed that a lot of people faced the same struggle. I saw many sets of eyes that focused on the firefighters wearing t-shirts from their own hometown department, even saw a few who took a few steps towards them. But there was that hesitation.

What do you say to them? “I’m so sorry for your loss” seems trite. “Thank you” doesn’t seem to come anywhere nearly close enough to the gratitude they are owed for being willing to put their lives on the line to save a stranger every single day.

The firefighter community is so strong. It is called a “brotherhood.” And I can’t think of a more appropriate term, because that is exactly what it is to them. These aren’t colleagues they lost: they were family members.

And as has been reported, this event was the single biggest loss of firefighters since September 11th.

As the out-of-town and out-of-state firefighters leave for home, they are placing t-shirts from their own departments on the shrubbery along the sidewalk. States from here all the way to California are represented in a final show of support: “We are here with you.”

More than once, I choked back some tears of my own. There is no way to prepare yourself for a scene like this. No matter how much you look at the photos or the videotape, it does not prepare you at all for the enormity of what you see when you get there.

I was actually beginning to congratulate myself for not losing my composure. Then I passed a scene that had been blocked from my view by a group of people. I don’t really know why this is what got me, of all that is there to take in; I can’t explain how this hit a nerve harder than anything else. But for some reason, this was too much:

In memory:

Engineer Brad Baity

Capt. Mike Benke

Firefighter Melvin Champaign

Firefighter James “Earl” Allen Drayton

Assistant Engineer Michael French

Capt. William “Billy” Hutchinson III

Engineer Mark Kelsey

Capt. Louis Mulkey

Firefighter Brandon Thompson

Small World

It is 1709 miles from the heart of Charleston to Santa Fe. The distance is notable because today Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico ordered flags in his state flown at half-staff to honor the nine firefighters killed Monday night here in the Holy City.

In a press release today, Richardson said:

““Firefighters are trained to make the ultimate sacrifice -- to walk into the worst danger and to risk their lives without hesitation,” said Governor Bill Richardson. “Early this week, nine South Carolina firefighters ran into a burning building to protect the lives of their fellow citizens trapped inside. These firefighters taught us the true meaning of the words courage, honor, and duty."

"The citizens of New Mexico are grateful for the actions of these selfless heroes and it is with great sadness that we extend our thoughts and prayers to the families and friends that were left behind.”

Go Hug a Firefighter

After work tonight, as I was on my way back from my first follow-up weigh in at MUSC, I saw a massive column of black smoke over West Ashley. I drove down Highway 17 until I was met with police cars blocking the road.

At this point, I could see that a local sofa store was the source of the smoke. Flames lept from the roof of the building. It was an incredible scene. Over the next few hours, as firefighters struggled to bring the fire under control, the news went from bad to worse: the building collapsed, trapping several firefighters inside. At this moment, they are believed lost. UPDATE: Nine firefighters died fighting the fire, making it the deadliest single fire incident for firefighters since September 11, 2001.

It is this kind of tragedy that these people face every day, while we go about our lives so often pretending that we’re the ones who have it rough.

The next time you see a firefighter, or a paramedic, or a cop, thank them. It’s the least you can do.

The Accent Meme

Anyone who works in broadcasting is encouraged to lose as much of their native accents as possible, particularly if you have very noticeable ones, common in the South and New England. I guess I’ve had some degree of success.

I found this meme at a local Charleston blog, but Firefox hung up and I wound up losing the bookmark of where it was. In any case, here’s my result:

What American accent do you have? (Best version so far) Northern You have a Northern accent. That could either be the Chicago/Detroit/Cleveland/Buffalo accent (easily recognizable) or the Western New England accent that news networks go for.

Click Here to Take This Quiz Brought to you by YouThink.com quizzes and personality tests.

The funny thing is, I’ve had people in the South ask me where I was born, assuming that I wasn’t from here. I’ve had people in the North tell me, “I just love your Southern accent!”

I’m so confused.
What’s yours?

Opinions, Please

Here is a question for all bloggers and readers: how do you feel about relative anonymity in the blogosphere?

Do you use your real name on your blog? Do you identify yourself by your first and last name? Have you ever had a problem because of that? Are you only comfortable giving your first name, or do you prefer a “nickname” that keeps your real identity a secret? Is there a reason why?

If you don’t have a blog, which way would you go if you were to start one?

There are no right or wrong answers here...I’d just like to get your feedback on this topic.

The Burning Question

The local community of Mount Pleasant has banned smoking in indoor workplaces, including restaurants and bars, effective September 1st, according to the Post and Courier. The city of Charleston plans to enact its own smoking ban in July.

Unlike Charleston and nearby Sullivan’s Island, whose smoking bans carry a maximum fine of $500 per offense and up to 30 days in jail, Mount Pleasant’s only carries a top fine of $100 and no jail time. Still, once the law takes effect, smokers could really pay a stiff price for lighting up.

Some restaurant and bar owners are less than enthusiastic, because they think the ban will send their profits up in smoke. I’ve been to restaurants with a non-smoking section just a few feet away from a smoking section without so much as a partition to separate them. Smoke, unfortunately, doesn’t seem to care which section it drifts into.

Naturally, the biggest criticism comes from smokers who think that they have a right to smoke where they please. (As far as I know, smoking isn’t listed in the Constitution, but that’s an argument for another day.) I can understand their position, even though I don’t smoke. I find it odd that so many of them seem unable to understand my position.

I have a problem with cigarette smoke. It’s not a life-threatening problem, but it’s a problem nonetheless. To put it simply, I have a mild allergy to smoke. When I’m in a room with a lot of cigarette smoke, my eyes begin watering, my throat becomes scratchy and I start coughing. I have friends who don’t smoke and who also don’t seem to be affected by people who do. So maybe I’m in the minority when it comes to dealing with cigarette smoke.

A while back, I ran a Patrick’s Place Poll about a ban on trans-fats in restaurants:

Is the government right to force restaurants to stop using trans-fats?

39% - Yes. We’re not doing a good-enough job of eating healthy on our own, so we need all the help we can get.

61% - No. What we eat (and figuring out what is and isn’t healthy) should be left up to us.

I can understand these results. We all have a choice when it comes to eating “unhealthy” food. If you don’t want to eat food dripping with oil, we can avoid those restaurants that serve them.

The problem is, smoking isn’t just about the smoker. If smokers decided that they’d just get their fix with a nicotine patch, that handy little aid that is supposed to help people kick the habit, I wouldn’t object. Why would I, after all? That’s completely their business. I’m in no way affected by the delivery of nicotine in their system.

But when they get their nicotine the old-fashioned way, they’re polluting the same air I have to breathe. They’re making me uncomfortable. And, according to health experts who warn about the dangers of second-hand smoke, they’re creating a potentially-unhealthy situation for me, not just themselves. And I have a problem with that.

Sure, smokers could take a look at me and argue that weight is likely to send the grim reaper my way a lot sooner than the little bit of badness I inhale from their cigarettes. The point is, however, that I’m on a weight loss and fitness plan, through which I’ve lost 58 pounds, in order to get healthier. I’m not trying to shed the pounds so I can then get out more and wind up with emphysema or lung cancer because of their smoking.

That, I think, is the line in the sand when it comes to judging the fairness of such laws. If it’s a problem that affects other people, I tend to not have a problem with the government stepping in to control it.

Do you agree? The new Patrick’s Place Poll asks your position on smoking bans. Vote now.

Rather Unimpressed

News flash: Dan Rather doesn’t like The CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.

Go ahead, get some water. Maybe you should lie down for a few minutes and recover from the shock. Come back when you’re composed enough.

Back? Right, then.

Rather says his former newscast has been "dumbing it down, tarting it up," and that they're really focusing too much on celebrity coverage.

TV Squad has a discussion about those remarks.

Is the show really so “dumbed down?” The question for Rather is, “dumbed down” compared to what? I don’t see major changes in the way the stories are reported since he left the anchor desk. When he was there, as I recall, the target audience didn’t seem to be the Harvard crowd.

The stories in the headlines at CBS tonight were about a loophole that allowed the Virginia Tech shooter to buy his deadly weapons being closed; another attack on the Iraq mosque and the possibility that more violence will erupt as a result; the nuclear terrorist threat the country faces, according to the nation’s FBI chief; and a health report on ovarian cancer. It sounds like pretty adult, serious topics to me.

“Tarting it up?” TV Squad speculates that this could only be a reference to “Katie’s legs.” If that is he meant, that’s a pretty crass thing to say. I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with a female news anchor. Katie isn’t the first, though she is the first solo network anchor. If I flip between her and Brian Williams, I don’t see any real difference in the level of testosterone or estrogen in the stories themselves. Williams has more of the traditional “anchorman” persona. That doesn’t, in and of itself, make him better or worse.

Over at ABC, Charlie Gibson has a much more personable, friendly persona. He’s the friendliest anchor since Bob Schieffer handed the reins to Katie. That doesn’t make him better, either. Only, perhaps, a little easier to watch.

Too much celebrity coverage? Has Rather seen the news? If he thinks Katie spends too much time on Paris and the like, she’s in good company. All of the network newscasts, I’m fairly certain, have covered Paris Hilton’s prison adventure. All have covered other celebrity-related stories that probably never should have been considered for a national half-hour newscast.

It makes one wonder how much of his remarks is based on real concerns for his former professional home, and how much is based in sour grapes.

Bible 101?

South Carolina lawmakers have backed a bill that would allow elective high school courses on the Old and New Testament of the Bible, according to an article in last week’s Post and Courier.

As you can imagine, this has triggered a big debate between believers and non-believers. And I can see both sides.

I don’t see the argument that it doesn’t belong in school at all; I think the fact that it is presented as an elective course ought to be enough to calm those concerns. I think it can have a perfectly valid place in school, but that there are too many potential problems stacked against it for it to work out that way.

There are those -- mostly believers -- who say that the classes will give students a lesson in history and literature. The Bible does contain a lot of history, and it is regarded as one of the world’s most famous pieces of literature. (The big debate there is whether or not it belongs on the fiction or nonfiction shelf.)

I bet that there are a lot of people who are hoping that students who aren’t necessarily religious who do take the course will end up being more religious. That’s an odd position for some believers to take, since some of them have never bothered to do any kind of elaborate study of the bible themselves.

There are also those -- some of whom are non-believers -- who argue that it is wrong for one faith to be placed above any other in a school curriculum, which would seem to violate the concept of Separation of Church and State.

Democratic Representative Joe Neal offered an amendment to expand the teachings to other religious texts, such as the Torah:

“If this is an attempt to get around the Constitution and insert a faith above another faith, that’s a mistake. I’m a Christian, but I don’t believe my faith ought to be fostered in a way that’s not honest and above board.”

I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately, that amendment failed.

No matter whether you believe in God and/or respect the Bible, if the goal is to educate children about history and literature, there is no reason to focus solely on the Bible. Religion, as much as some seem to want to deny it, has a major impact on our world. People die every day because of other people’s religious conviction. It is unwise to try to pretend that it is somehow unacceptable to be exposed to other people’s viewpoints.

My biggest problem with this proposed course, beyond the implication that Christianity is being unfairly promoted, is that it seems to me that this is a course that doesn’t belong in high school. Who’s going to teach it? What is that teacher’s own religious views? How biased might the presentation be either way? It would be a detriment to the students to have the course taught by a bible-thumper or an anti-religious zealot. Either opinion would be worth considering, and the effects of those opinions on our culture should be considered if we’re really out to teach a lesson about religion itself. But neither should be allowed to present the material itself.

In a college setting, the course could be administered through a school of religious studies. But a course like this, I think, shouldn’t be left to someone who knows the bible because of what they learned in Sunday School, or because of what they were told by religious figures they grew up resenting.

It’s too sensitive a topic to fall into either extreme, and it seems too easy for it to go either way.

Stormy Weather

So here’s a look at my kind of luck, for those of you interested. Here I am, minding my own business, taking a day off from work. My intention was to get out and do something outside, take some pictures, decompress. I thought of going to Cypress Gardens and having a look around.

Mother Nature had a different idea for the day. Here’s a look at the local radar, from WCBD-TV:


Aside from a string of severe thunderstorm watches and warnings that have been activating the beloved Emergency Alert System, and thereby interrupting every show I try to watch on every channel I turn to, there is also a tornado warning.

Even the dogs, who normally don’t get remotely upset at the sound of thunder, seem a little uneasy. Maybe I should have just gone to work.

100 Years Ago Today

I spent the weekend at home with the parents so that we could make a special trip this afternoon. The mission was simple: I wanted to place flowers on the grave of my maternal grandmother, Mildred, who was born 100 years ago today.

When I was little, both of my parents worked; during the day, I would stay with her. When I started school, she would pick me up when it let out. She was a major influence on me until her death, far too young, at 74. At the time, I was 12.

Shortly before she died, I interviewed her for a composition I was writing for an English class. She wasn’t thrilled with the topic, “My Favorite Old-Timer,” and her answer to my first question, “When were you born?” was, “Am I supposed to tell the truth?”

I’ll post more about that interview and what she had to say about growing up in the early part of the 20th century in a very rural community later this summer.

One of the things I remember most about her was the way she treated others. She would help anyone who needed it. She treated everyone the same. My dad has said many times over the years that she treated him like he was her son, not her son-in-law. She treated me like I was her son, not her grandson.

She was the first person very close to me who I lost, and it was a lesson about death that I would never really have been ready to learn. My biggest regret, I think, is not really having the opportunity to know her as an adult. I would have loved the chance to talk with her about worried I would have later in life. It’s hard to believe that she had been gone for 25 years.

Interestingly enough, for people who enjoy these kind of numerical coincedences -- I have an aunt who delights in them -- my grandmother, the oldest of ten children, was 37 when she had my mom, who was the youngest of five. My mom was 37 when my grandmother died. And I’m 37 as we pause to celebrate what would have been her 100th birthday. Odd, isn’t it?

My mom said she would have been “tickled” to know that we placed flowers on her grave today. It was something I just really wanted -- even needed -- to do today. There are those rare times when I think she’d be proud of me. Most of the time, I have my doubts for reasons I can’t always explain.