"What's the best thing about today?"
One thing that I love about church is that no matter what, even if the message doesn't resonate as strongly as previous messages have, I always take something away. Today was no exception. Pastor Thom is away doing a wedding in Southern California, so Pastor Kevin delivered today's message. He made a good point today about there being a difference between being "happy" and being "joyful." Happiness is inconsistent and situational, whereas joyfulness is secure and permanent. Not to downgrade the idea of being "happy," but given that happiness is fleeting, I would rather spend more time in becoming joyful. One of the most wonderful things about having a working, loving relationship with God is that you can have joy- even in times of grief or distress- because you know that in the end, there is an eternal home for you that is greater than anything we can imagine. And that's just awesome!
I'd like to share more, but as it turns out Uptown Espresso is frigid and I'm a-goin' home. Perhaps I'll add on once I get in front of the fireplace? We'll see.
Recently Mark Penn (Hillary's chief political strategist) told reporters: “Winning Democratic primaries is not a qualification or a sign of who can win the general election. If it were, every nominee would win because every nominee wins Democratic primaries.” This comment has stirred some pretty lively discussion on one of my favorite political blogs, Talking Points Memo. Foolishly, I offered $5.00 to the first person who could correctly identify Penn's logical fallacy, and was quickly overwhelmed with a flurry of well-composed responses arguing fallacies ranging from False Dichotomy to the "Fallacy of the Overpaid and Inept Sophist." The latter is my favorite, so I'll just post it right here:
I think it's called the Fallacy of the Overpaid and Inept Sophist:
He's pointing out that winning primaries is not a sufficient condition for a Democrat to win the presidency. (But as Killjoy points out, it's traditionally been a necessary condition; and if one where looking for the type of primary winner who DOES win general elections, one might suspect look for one who boosts Dem turnout and wins independents).
I think the logical form of the point Penn wants to make -- that winning primaries is a poor measure of GE-worthiness, and the more you win in a row, the less electable you are -- might resemble an arguement like this:
P: Not all humans speak can speak French.
P: Pierre is a human.
C: Therefore, Pierre does not speak French.
(If this suffices, melissa, please donate $5 to Barack Obama in my honor -- if that is legal.)
I don't know how many Iowans will ever see this, but that's not the point. I just want to express my appreciation to everyone that leaves the warm comfort of their homes today to go out and caucus for Obama. Being from California, I never really have to put myself in physical discomfort to work for our campaign, and being that it's quite literally 3 degrees in Iowa, I consider myself to be very fortunate. So, once again, thank you so much for going out of your way to stand for change- y'all should feel really good about the work you're doing. Give yourselves a pat on the back and a warm mug of hot chocolate! :)
