Feb. 24th, 2008
How Would Jesus Vote? - washingtonpost.com:
Relatedly, there's another article/editorial on the challenge on who will replace the lates Fallwell and (D. James) Kennedy as the self-proclaimed speaker for the faithful in the political world. I personally find them all appalling, as do most of you. Then again, I seem to have evolved a different interpretation to what blasphemy means than they have. Holding the name of the Lord before you as a vanity is what was originally meant in that, and that is precisely what these men do, and always has been.
A few months ago, while participating in an early-morning panel discussion in the heart of Manhattan, I was startled fully awake when a man stood up to declare that Democrats who reached out to religious voters, especially evangelicals, were akin to those who collaborated with the Nazis. I put on a sweet smile of Christian charity and counted to 10.Whole article is a good read on the recent history of the relationships between the more vocal faiths and the two parties.
Comments like that explain why so many of us liberals who also happen to be evangelicals have stayed in the closet for so long. It is hard to overcome decades of suspicion, much of it richly earned by leaders of the religious right who used faith in the cause of a political power grab and in the name of intolerance and fear. But the lingering misconceptions are also painful reminders of the price people like myself have paid for staying silent while others claimed a monopoly on faith. And the country has paid, too.
Relatedly, there's another article/editorial on the challenge on who will replace the lates Fallwell and (D. James) Kennedy as the self-proclaimed speaker for the faithful in the political world. I personally find them all appalling, as do most of you. Then again, I seem to have evolved a different interpretation to what blasphemy means than they have. Holding the name of the Lord before you as a vanity is what was originally meant in that, and that is precisely what these men do, and always has been.
what was that sound?
Feb. 24th, 2008 03:16 pmHeh - every so often, my brain is finally able to take apart a complex sound/mix and actually figure out what instruments are involved in making it. This is particularly tricky for older music where synth technology didn't allow for being able to construct any timbre you wanted.
One instance a few years back was figuring out that one of the "organs" used in the descending wash scales early on side 2 of Mike Oldfield's Ommadawn was actually Paddy Maloney playing only the regulators (but not the chanter) on his Irish pipes.
The song today that I just cracked was the AT40 #1 this week (26 years ago), Centerfold - what was that opening tone made from, 'cause it wasn't a synthesizer?
It's 2 instruments together: the hammond organ and J Giels himself on an amplified harmonica!
One instance a few years back was figuring out that one of the "organs" used in the descending wash scales early on side 2 of Mike Oldfield's Ommadawn was actually Paddy Maloney playing only the regulators (but not the chanter) on his Irish pipes.
The song today that I just cracked was the AT40 #1 this week (26 years ago), Centerfold - what was that opening tone made from, 'cause it wasn't a synthesizer?
It's 2 instruments together: the hammond organ and J Giels himself on an amplified harmonica!