Sunday Morning Roundtable IV

As 2009 closes, it’s time to grade the President on his first year. As discussed in a previous post, President Obama recently gave his own performance a “good, solid B-plus.”

Some on the left are disappointed in the President’s lack of progress on the environment or on getting health care reform completed (while the Senate and House have each passed a version of the bill, there is no final law until the two houses of Congress work out their differences).

Those on the right, who naturally are more aligned with the President’s increase of forces in Afghanistan, are unhappy with the President’s domestic agenda as shown in his health care priorities. Meanwhile, the economy remains sluggish.

So, perhaps there is something there for everyone to like, but also something for everyone to dislike. What do you think? How has Obama Year One been?

Merry Christmas

The Rebel Jesus
music and lyrics by Jackson Browne

Now the streets are filled with laughter and light
And the music of the season
And the merchants' windows are all bright
With the faces of the children
And the families hurrying to their homes
As the sky darkens and freezes
Will be gathering around the hearths and tables
Giving thanks for God's graces
And the birth of the rebel Jesus

They call him by the "Prince of Peace"
And they call him by "The Savior"
And they pray to him upon the seas
And in every bold endeavor
And they fill his churches with their pride and gold
As their faith in him increases
But they've turned the nature that I worship in
From a temple to a robber's den
In the words of the rebel Jesus

We guard our world with locks and guns
And we guard our fine possessions
And once a year when Christmas comes
We give to our relations
And perhaps we give a little to the poor
If the generosity should seize us
But if any one of us should interfere
In the business of why there are poor
They get the same as the rebel Jesus

But pardon me if I have seemed
To take the tone of judgment
For I've no wish to come between
This day and your enjoyment
In this life of hardship and of earthly toil
We have need for anything that frees us
So I bid you pleasure and I bid you cheer
From a heathen and a pagan
On the side of the rebel Jesus.


Listen to the song here.

Christmas (Baby Please Come Home)

In 1963 Phil Spector released A Christmas Gift for You, an album of mostly secular Christmas standards. The enduring song, in my mind, is “Christmas (Baby Please Come Home),” recorded by Darlene Love.

For several years, David Letterman has brought Love onto his program just prior to Christmas to sing this song. She’s on the show tonight (11:35pm CBS) and the annual Christmas show, which also always features Jay Thomas, is appointment viewing in my house. Several years of episodes are also on the DVR.

Here is Love’s 2005 performance. Check it out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXVcrWO5FCg

At Dusk on The Shortest Day of The Year

The Christmas Revels is an annual performance held in Cambridge, Massachusetts and several other cities, with each year's performance celebrating the holiday traditions of a specific culture. There are elements that recur each year, including the final poem, which is as follows:

The Shortest Day
By Susan Cooper

And so the Shortest Day came and the year died
And everywhere down the centuries of the snow-white world
Came people singing, dancing,
To drive the dark away.
They lighted candles in the winter trees;
They hung their homes with evergreen;
They burned beseeching fires all night long
To keep the year alive.
And when the new year’s sunshine blazed awake
They shouted, revelling.
Through all the frosty ages you can hear them
Echoing behind us – listen!
All the long echoes, sing the same delight,
This Shortest Day,
As promise wakens in the sleeping land:
They carol, feast, give thanks,
And dearly love their friends,
And hope for peace.
And now so do we, here, now,
This year and every year.

Welcome Yule!

She's Just One of the Boys...

Photo: masslive.com

Martha Coakley, Democrat Nominee for the special election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts, has flip-flopped on her support of health care legislation.

Previously, Coakley had said she would not support a health care bill that restricted federal funding of abortion as does the current Senate bill. In fact, she used the issue to pummel her primary opponent, Rep. Mike Capuano. Quoting from The Boston Globe, Coakley said the following during her primary campaign:

“Let’s be clear on what’s principled here. If it comes down to this in the Senate, and it’s the health care bill or violating women’s rights, where does he stand?’’

We should now ask the same of Martha Coakley.

Again quoting from The Globe, just last week Coakley was asked “whether she would vote against a bill that went beyond current law in restricting abortion coverage,” and Coakley responded, “Yes, that’s right.’’

Yet here we are a week later, and she has changed her position. What happened?

One development was that Senator Ben Nelson (D - Nebraska) came on board to support the Senate health care bill, meaning not only that all 60 Senate Democrats were together on the issue, but that they had their filibuster–proof majority with or without Coakley.

Prior to Nelson supporting the bill, Coakley may have thought she could go in to the Senate as the potential 60th vote, in which case she could demand some concession for her support. Instead, she would now (assuming victory on Jan. 19) arrive in Washington as the most junior of Senators (albeit in the majority), unwilling to buck the entirety of her party’s caucus on this legislation.

What does Coakley’s about-face tell us about the timing of the bill, however? What it tells me is that despite predictions of finishing health care by year’s end, Coakley thinks the issue could still be hot when she would potentially arrive in the Senate in January. Why else would she switch positions? If she thought the bill would be finished and gone, she could still oppose the version under consideration and then, upon arrival in the Senate, explain to her new colleagues that her opposition was a campaign necessity and there would be no harm to her position since the bill was already passed. Instead, Coakley apparently believes she may need to take a vote on the issue and doesn’t want to get off on the wrong foot with her potential new colleagues.

So what we have here is nothing principled, but a demonstration instead that Coakley is perhaps all-too prepared for the horse-trading and currying of favor that happens in Washington. She seems to understand that such partisan politics is a victimless crime, unless you count principles that get sacrificed along the way.

More Thoughts on Christmas

National Public Radio’s Barbara Bradley Hagerty recently published a wonderful piece on Washington’s National Cathedral Boy Choristers. The written story, with an audio link, is located here.

The Story focuses largely on a 12 year old choir member, Nick Bairatchnyi, who offers this perspective on Christmas:

"When you're little, you always think Christmas is about presents. But then as you grow up, you really figure out what it means to celebrate Christmas — especially when you're singing in the choir," he says. "It's really about ... I don't want to say 'giving,' because that will sound really corny. But I mean, it is about giving and about being thankful for what you have, and pretty much thanking God for saving humanity."

Sunday Morning Roundtable III

After an all night session, the parties at the Climate Conference came away with, essentially, an agreement in principal. Critics complain that it is not enforceable but others (who are, ironically, often the President’s critics) point out that President Obama held the line on another financial “bailout,” this time handing millions to other countries.

What happened in Copenhagan and is it good or bad for the United States?

Nine Days 'til Christmas. Are You ready?

It's Christmas Eve.
It's the one night of the year when we all act a little nicer.
We smile a little easier. We share a little more.
For a couple of hours out of the whole year we are the people that we always hoped we would be.

It's a miracle; it’s really a sort of a miracle, because it happens every Christmas Eve,
and if you waste that miracle, you're going to burn for it. I know what I’m talking about.

You have to do something. You have to take a chance; you do have to get involved. There are people that are having trouble making their miracle happen.
There are people that don't have enough to eat; there are people that are cold.
You can go and say hello to these people.
Take an old blanket out of the closet and say “Here.”
You can make them a sandwich and say, "Oh, by the way, here."
I get it now!

If you give, then it can happen, then the miracle can happen to you.
It’s not just the poor and the hungry, it’s everybody who’s got to have this miracle, and it can happen tonight for all of you!
If you believe in this, the miracle will happen and you'll want it to happen again tomorrow!

You won't be one of those people that say, "Christmas is once a year and it's a fraud."
It's not! It can happen every day. You've just got to want that feeling!
And if you like it and you want it you’ll get greedy for it!
You'll want it every day of your life, and it can happen to you!
I believe in it now.
I believe it's going to happen to me, now. I'm ready for it!
And it's great. It's a good feeling.
It's really better than I've felt in a long time.

I'm ready. Have a Merry Christmas, everybody.

- From the movie Scrooged, written by Mitch Glazer and Michael O’Donoghue

President Grades His First 11 Months

photo: New York Daily News

On a show broadcast on Sunday, President Obama graded his first eleven months in the White House. Speaking to Oprah Winfrey, he gave himself a “good, solid B-plus."

When the President said that passage of Health Care Reform would improve that grade, he missed the point. If Healthcare is one of the major (if not the major) initiatives of his Presidency, doesn’t failure to pass it at this point constitute a failure? It could pass, of course, and that will change the situation, but until such time, doesn’t he deserve at best an “Incomplete” on Healthcare?

Further, with President Obama’s commitment of 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, it is fair to say (and it has been said) that this war now becomes “his,” and this major initiative also remains Incomplete.

Eleven months into his term, I would argue that everything is now “his.” No more blaming the previous administration for bills in the bottom drawer or mistaken policy decisions. The buck stops with Obama.

Once upon a time, the President taught at the University of Chicago, and I can’t imagine Professor Obama would objectively reward 10% unemployment with a B+. If so, I wish I had taken his course!

I can’t help but wonder if the President’s ego and/or enthusiasm is getting the better of him. Just as the Nobel committee rewarded him for promise and potential, he seems to be grading himself on his hopes and dreams for America rather than on actual accomplishment. As Dr. Curt Connors said to Peter Parker in the movie Spider-Man 2, “Planning is not a major at this university.”

Speaking politically, it was foolish of the President to give himself a high grade with the economy the way it is. He just handed fodder to his opponents. He would have been better off tacitly acknowledging that Americans are worried, hurting, and concerned. He could have said “You know, Oprah, some of the things we’re doing take time. I’ll grade myself after a full term, not just one year.” In this case, Mr. President, a humble “Incomplete” would have been the path to choose.

Sunday Morning Roundtable II

Each Sunday we take a cue from the Sunday morning political talk shows and encourage discussion and debate on a topic (usually political) from the week. This week’s topic for your commentary:

The next presidential election is still three years away and so it’s time for all kinds of speculation! With a first-term Democrat in the White House, most of the speculation is, of course, on the Republican side.

There was a recent story on cnn.com about an effort to draft Dick Cheney to run for president. I have also heard speculation about Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh as potential candidates. Of course, Mitt Romney could run a second time or there could be first-time presidential runs by other Republicans such as Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota. Sarah Palin is out there, too.

Maybe my imagination isn’t creative enough, but I have a hard time envisioning Beck, Limbaugh, or Cheney ever running, let alone having any chance of success. Am I wrong on this? Do you think any of these three could put together serious campaigns? Would you vote for them?

Where No Man Has Gone Before...

Image: startrek.com

Hero Complex recently posted excerpts from a Minnesota Daily article that, in part, told the story of a linguist’s endeavor to teach his newborn son a language other than his (the linguist’s) own native tongue.

The linguist, d’Armond Speers, spoke one language and one language only to his son from the time of his birth until the son was three years old.

Why am I telling you this story, you wonder? Because the language the linguist spoke exclusively to his son was Klingon, the language of the fictional alien race of the same name from Star Trek.

From the original article by Tara Bannow:

“I was interested in the question of whether my son, going through his first language acquisition process, would acquire it like any human language,” Speers said. “He was definitely starting to learn it.”

I am pleased to report that the story has a happy ending, because, as Bannow writes:

“His son is now in high school and doesn’t speak a word of Klingon.”

I wonder how the kid’s Romulan is coming along?

A Concord Carpenter Contest

There’s something interesting going on over at A Concord Carpenter Comments. The Concord Carpenter has come up with an innovative way to drive site traffic, gain followers, and appear on other blogs. He’s giving away a socket set and readers of his blog earn entries into the contest by following his blog, posting about his contest on their own blogs (this post earns me two entries!), Tweeting, and emailing others about it.

As readers of Concord Carpenter’s blog know, he’s one creative guy, and I’ve got to hand it to him on this. What a great idea!

As I learn more and more about life around the blogosphere, this is one marketing effort I’ll keep in mind for my own promotional toolbox.

Check out this contest, and while you’re there, look around Concord Carpenter’s blog. As he says, he’s not only a Carpenter; he’s also a Cop and a Character, and all elements of his personality are on display on his blog.

Welcome!

Welcome to the visitors coming over from A Concord Pastor Comments, A Concord Carpenter Comments, and I Ain’t No Oprah! I’ve been an avid reader and fan of each of these blogs for a while. They each represent different corners of the blogosphere and I will be linking to them all at times as their material is excellent. If you’ve arrived here some other way than through their links, you should know that they are each worth a long look!

Particular thanks to the Concord Pastor for a post last night and to the Concord Carpenter for a post this morning, each about this blog. In his post, Concord Carpenter mentioned that this blog was already up to the number four position in Google search for “A Third Moment.” I just checked and, thanks to links from these two blogs, we’re now at the number one position. Thanks, guys!

A Quarter for Your Thoughts

In 1976 the U.S. Quarter received a temporary makeover, with the traditional year under the image of George Washington’s profile becoming “1776 – 1976” and the eagle on the reverse side replaced by a colonial drummer.

This version of the quarter lasted only a single year in celebration of the nation’s bicentennial, with the traditional layout returning in 1977. Something about the design, however, struck a chord with my father, who set about collecting ’76 Quarters. He stored the coins in (what became) dozens and dozens of old film containers, which were just the right size for this purpose. My father didn’t have a lot of collections, certainly not at that time, and being a dutiful 11 year old son, I set aside these coins anytime I came across them, which was quite often, of course, in the early years.

As the years passed, I continued to put aside ’76 Quarters when I saw them, and when returning home from college or later on, when visiting my parents, I would hand my father five, ten, or however many I had recently removed from circulation. The frequency of finding these coins became less and less with each passing year, but each time I encountered one I would think, “I can’t wait to surprise Dad.” Every time I would add to his collection, he would thank me, beaming at the joy of a shared hunt with cherished prizes.

My father passed away in 2004, some 28 years after starting his collection. Without him there as the keeper of the collection, I have continued to set aside ’76 Quarters when I find them. However, my collection is different than my father’s. Whereas he put his coins carefully away in film containers, I position my ’76 Quarters around the corners of my life: in my car, on my desk at work, in a few locations at home, in my pocket. All places where I will see and touch the coins on a daily basis, and by so doing, remain in touch with my Dad.

My experience tells me that relatively few ’76 Quarters remain in circulation currently. Even coins wear out, although more slowly than bills. I also know that other people collect these coins and so I am not alone in removing them from circulation. So it is with less and less frequency that I encounter a ’76 Quarter, but I did today. It was in the holder in which I put change in my car, sitting right on top and staring up at me. As I always do when a coin of my heart’s realm finds its way to me, I smiled and thought of my Dad, because he was with me again in that instant, the memories of so many happy moments coming back to me.

So How Did I Do?

So four candidates go home, and two go on to battle in the final election for a seat in the U.S. Senate, but the most important question remains: how close were my predictions to the results?

Here are the predictions I published seven hours before the polls opened in Massachusetts (see previous post):

Coakley: 44%
Capuano: 35%
Pagliuca: 12%
Khazei: 9%

The actual results are as follows:

Coakley: 47%
Capuano: 28%
Khazei: 13%
Pagliuca: 12%

Not bad, if I do say so myself! I was not far off on the Coakley number, and I had the Pagliuca number spot on. Boy, if Steve paid me a couple hundred grand to tell him how he’d do, he could have saved a lot of money and we’d both be better off!

The real surprise to me was Khazei outperforming my expectations and Capuano underperforming them. A quick look at Khazei’s numbers looks as if he had pretty consistent strength with some particular strength in some of the suburbs.

On the Republican side, there is no surprise in Scott Brown winning big. Now he faces the challenge of the general election, with the Holiday Season taking voters’ attention away combined with the usual institutional advantages favoring any Democrat. Add in the potential for a snowstorm like that which Greater Boston had this morning, and the turnout could be abysmally low, as it was yesterday with less than 15% of the electorate participating in these primaries. That would all add up to another day at the polls dominated by the political machine and a big win for Coakley.

Political Crystal Ball

As I write, we’re just hours away from the polls opening for the Democrat and Republican primaries to nominate candidates for the open U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts. In 24 hours, every media outlet will tell you what happened. Tonight, I’m telling you what will happen.

First, as a special election, these races are all about turnout. These are the kinds of elections that turn on the strength of the candidates’ field operations. Money means less than in most elections, particularly when the money is spent on saturation advertizing (that means you, Steve Pagliuca). The air cover of ads is important in normally scheduled races when casual voters are accustomed to turning out, but in special elections paid ads are secondary to a professional Get-Out-the-Vote effort.

This means a significant edge for Martha Coakley, who has the support of organized labor in this race. She’ll have the needed machinery with built-in targeted voter lists and her vote will get out.

Mike Capuano will also have a base that he can turn out from his Congressional district. The machines from the communities he already represents will turn out a heavy vote, but unfortunately for him, his base is one-tenth of the statewide electorate while Coakley’s will have broader reach.

Steve Pagliuca has succeeded in making himself a household name to many with his saturation advertising, but unless he spent even more money on voter ID efforts and a voter turnout effort for tomorrow, he’ll finish well behind the two professional politicians in the race.

Lastly, Alan Khazei seems like a likable first-time candidate who is learning on the job. An endorsement from The Boston Globe sounds nice and is an achievement, but I’m betting The Globe’s Editorial Board won’t be driving anyone other than themselves to the polls tomorrow.

On the Republican side, the party is solidly behind State Senator Scott Brown. If he doesn’t trounce Jack E. Robinson, it speaks volumes about Brown’s campaign and he’s in even bigger trouble in January than I already thought. Turnout in the Republican primary will be light, making the exact margin of victory unpredictable, but Brown should win big.

On the Democrat side, here’s the finish: Coakley 44%, Capuano 35%, Pagliuca 12%, Khazei 9%.

As We Seated and Were Darkened

The other night I was out in the car with my son and we decided to drive by a house that we have driven past every year at this time, in order to see its over the top, fairly outrageous, holiday light display.

As we approached, I reminded my son, “You can see the lights from blocks away,” but we saw nothing. As we got closer, still dark. Then, we came upon the house. No lights whatsoever.

This was a surprising and deflating end to our impromptu quest. This house has for years had lights, statues, and inflatables all over the lawn. It was one of those houses that had multiple cars slowed to a stop in front of it every evening during December. I was truly surprised to see nothing but empty lawn and darkened windows.

Then, we wondered, what happened here? Is this formerly bright display, which brought light to many, a victim of the economy? Had the house changed hands? Had the Producer of this Holiday Display taken ill or passed away?

These questions will remain unanswered. We live several towns away from the display and don’t know any of the neighbors (such was the grandeur of this display that it drew us, and others, I’m sure, from miles away). We have no way of knowing why the lights are out this year. Perhaps they will return, and I’ll check back next year to see, just in case. For now, however, our questions remain. What happened and why?

There are, of course, many bigger and broader issues that beg the questions “what happened and why,” but the “littler” issues ones count, often very deeply, in our heart. I wonder about this house and the person who wanted to display his/her holiday spirit in such a visible, public fashion. Do they know their display and the light they shared is missed? I’m sure we weren’t the only car to drive by with its occupants deflated that night, and there will be many more in the nights to come. We will not be alone in our unanswered question, what happened?

All I can do for the Master of the Display is hope and pray for the best. If the economy crippled their financial ability to light up the night, I hope for better times ahead. If illness or death has interrupted or ceased the tradition, I pray for health or repose of their soul. If they simply moved to another home from which to display their Holiday Spirit, I wish them and their new audience all the best, and I can only hope to stumble upon their next display, or another like it, as I did this one some eleven years ago.

For me, while disappointing, this was an interesting journey with an unexpected twist at the end. It is a trip that I will remember every bit as much, if not more, than the journeys that ended with a view of the lights. I’m glad I shared this trip with my son, one more memory for each of us from his childhood. As I ponder the questions of what happened to the display and why, I am keenly aware that any of the possible explanations of why could be the situation here, and anything can happen to any of us at any time. I cherish each view of the lights, and each enjoyable moment with my sons.

We didn’t see Christmas lights that night, but I had one of the lights of my own life beside me for the whole ride home.

Sunday Morning Roundtable

Each Sunday I’ll take a cue from the Sunday morning political talk shows and encourage discussion and debate on a topic (usually political) from the week. No spin, no point of view from me, at least not initially, just a question for your commentary. This week’s topic:

President Obama this week announced the increase of US troops into Afghanistan, alienating many of his supporters on the Left. At the same time, he announced a time table for withdrawal, aggravating the Right. Was this a failed attempt by the President to please everyone which will instead result in satisfying no one? Or is this the President displaying leadership by defining a bold course no one thought about prior?

(More than) Seven Dirty Words

Another comedy routine that has been playing out before us for years is George Carlin’s line that “my stuff is stuff; your stuff is crap.” I can practically hear him saying “My politician is a good guy and everyone should admit it. Your politician is a dope.” Just about every day I hear someone complain that “Some people are too harshly critical of Obama; we all need to support the President.” Many of these same folks, of course, still spew the hate speech that George W. Bush is “an idiot.”

At the same time, many Republicans that complained about such treatment of Bush were none too kind about Bill Clinton, either. My point here is not to try to trace this pattern of hypocrisy to some root or to prove who did it first. Rather, just to point out the negative tenor of alleged “political debate.”

Bottom-line: name-calling is not political debate. Those that stoop to the lowest common denominator in this regard (even if light-heartedly) add nothing to the debate and quickly lose my attention and respect. If one actually engages in substantive debate, I listen and might even evolve my views. If you’re just expressing hate, I’ve got lots better things to do with my time than listen.

Yada, Yada

Some years ago Jerry Seinfeld observed that, in the age of free agency, fans of professional sports these days were doing little more than rooting for laundry.

He was right, of course. In the earlier days of pro sports, fans could freely attach themselves to players and teams simultaneously. One could root for Ted Williams and the Red Sox, knowing that, barring a league-shattering trade, the former would certainly be back with the latter year after year.

These days, with player movement as frequent as it is, it is a dicey proposition indeed to give one’s loyalty to a player, who may be gone from the home-town team at any time. Even players that seemed to be the cornerstones of their franchises are sometimes traded. Beloved his first few years with the Red Sox, Nomar Garciaparra was gone at the trading deadline in 2004. Those of us who cheer for the Sox, however, were able to adjust. Similarly, a year or so later when Johnny Damon left the Sox for the Yankees, he became the hardball equivalent of Benedict Arnold, and, incidentally, inspired the classic line “Johnny Damon: looks like Jesus, acts like Judas, throws like Mary!”

Now, why do I bring this up? Because Jerry Seinfeld, instead of observing the landscape of modern professional sports, could just as easily been making political commentary. Parties and politicians now routinely find themselves switching sides of political issues and many, whether elected officials or rank-and-file party registrants and adherents, blindly follow along.

A recent example was the manner in which the Massachusetts Legislature dealt with the appointment of a U.S. Senator in the event of a vacancy. In 2004, when John Kerry seemed actually capable of winning the presidency, Massachusetts Democrats successfully pushed through a change in the law so that the Governor (then Republican Mitt Romney) could not appoint an interim-Senator. The Democrats argued that this important matter should be left solely to the citizens, not to other politicians. Republicans, in the hope of having a U.S. Senator appointed from their party, argued that the Governor should appoint someone so that the Commonwealth was fully represented on the issues of the day.

Five years later, with a Senate seat from Massachusetts vacant and a Democrat Governor, Massachusetts Democrats decided that the Commonwealth needed full representation in the Senate and again pushed through a change in the law, this time giving the power to appoint back to the (now Democrat) Governor. Republicans argued that the naming of a U.S. Senator should be up to the people, not another politician.

This is just a recent and easy example of politicians’ positions being situational rather than deeply-held. It’s not an isolated event, by any stretch. Did you ever notice how many politicians’ views on the federal line-item veto depended on whether their party held the White House?

Now, for the politicians themselves, at some level this is all just business. It may be about trust in the President since he shares your party affiliation, or it may be about currying favor with one’s party leadership. Whatever the root cause, my guess is that the change in most politicians’ positions is highly calculated and reached very consciously. The farther we move from the principals involved, however, the less conscious the change in position. We all know people who blindly follow a party or a politician, regardless of changes in position. They blissfully ignore changes in position or, at the most, offer a tepid explanation such as “He said what he had to say to get elected” as if that is a virtue, or “Give him a chance” while making it obvious that there is no limit to their own patience since, you know, “their” politician is on the “right” team.

Leading Off

Why 'blog? Well, after over a year of posting on Facebook, my hope is that the forum of a ‘blog will allow for better and more detailed posts. Trying to be pithy and succinct sometimes prohibits complete exposition. So, hopefully this forum will allow for a more complete discussion as ideas are fleshed out more completely and debate is more robust.

What’s the title all about? The idea of A Third Moment comes from the philosophy of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel described a first moment, or Thesis, as a proposition, or idea. This is followed by a second moment, or Antithesis, which negates the thesis. Hegel’s third moment is the Synthesis, which resolves the conflict between the first two moments.

To the extent this ‘blog helps me to work through thoughts and ideas, it will create synthetic moments. Sometimes such synthesis will come in the preparation of a post, sometimes it may come from the interaction of post, comment, and further comment. This means, of course, that comments are encouraged, whether in agreement or disagreement to the initial post.

The idea of synthesis implies change. I may change my mind and I hope you are open to doing so, too!