http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:09:17 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/31/210917.php Stacy L HarpLast week four Christian Indonesian girls who were on their way to their Christian high school were attacked by hooded attackers who successfully beheaded three of the girls. However, what most people would consider an outrage, The Washington Post and the the LA Times doesn't even consider newsworthy.The Washington Post spent most of their ink dealing with the bird flu epidemic, and the LA Times gives this tragic story a two sentence blurb and doesn't even mention that the girls were Christians, thus implying the persecution of Christians isn't important. The New York Times, on the other hand, spends time telling the readers that this event happened and implies that Christians may engage in "revenge attacks"Indonesia (AP) -- Hundreds of security forces patrolled a tense Indonesian province Monday to prevent revenge attacks after assailants wearing black veils beheaded three Christian schoolgirls and seriously wounded a fourth.If the New York Times isn't implying that the Christians are the ones who will engage in "revenge attacks" then who are they referring to? History shows that the militant Muslims are the ones who engage in murder and beheading and not Christians.The New York Times goes on to report the initial reaction from the region's religious leaders.Fearing retaliations, religious leaders condemned the killings and urged calm. Both sides have refrained from blaming Muslim militants for the violence. "Until authorities arrest the killers and disclose the motive, it's too early to say this attack was religiously motivated,'' said Syafi'i Ma'arif, leader of Indonesia's second largest nonpolitical Muslim group Muhammadiyah. ''But I can say the Muslim community is shocked and deeply concerned about the inhumane killing of innocent students,'' he said, adding that the victims deserve justice. Although President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono ordered police to track down the killers, Christian residents said Monday they were afraid to leave their homes.Again the question remains, if what Syafi'i Ma'arif is true then why did he warn of future attacks in an October 5th interview he did with The Christian Science Monitor, citing Muslim vigilante groups?It seems clear to anyone with an eye for the facts that the MSM isn't interested in the beheading of three innocent Christian girls in Indonesia. On the other hand, if it had been three homosexuals or three Muslims I guarantee that the LA Times, the Washington Post and the New York Times would've had it on their front page.Take Action by contacting the Embassy of Indonesia in Washington, D.C. by calling 202-775-5200. For the most recent developments please also visit Persecution Blog.Ed:LisaM Culture38855@blogcritics.org Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:09:17 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/28/203728.php Stacy L HarpA few days ago New York Times writer Ned Martel wrote an article called Manna from Hollywood: Charity Begins on TV about NBC's new Friday night television show Three Wishes hosted by Grammy award winning singer Amy Grant.As I began to read Martel's critique of the show I was amazed to see that Martel took issue with a show that was designed to help people. To begin with, Martel begins by characterizing the whole idea of the show and how it is presented as a "traveling ministry, with revival tents pitched in a different small town every week," thereby insulting any and everyone who has ever attended a revival meeting of some sort.Martel also characterizes Grant by saying that the show actually "sets her up to actually play God." This is absolutely ridiculous because, just because she is the host of the show and one of the most visible Christians in America, does not mean that Amy Grant has a desire to play God. This also dismisses every other person who takes part in the program, as well as other shows and charities that reach out to those in need. And taken to its logical conclusion every host of every show in the world is then in the position to "play God" whether it be with their programming or desire to meet needs.And just when one thinks that Martel might have some axe to grind with Amy Grant because of her Christian faith, he compliments her by saying, Ms. Grant is an amiable, wholesome warbler, and she has an easy rapport with her small-town hosts. But her show arrives at a moment that is rife with celebrity saints showily raising hurricane-relief money or arranging televised giveaways for the less fortunate. Clearly, she feels something genuine for the aggrieved. The problem is that Three Wishes elevates the already sky-high power of celebrity, suggesting that only through her presence can the locals get their prayers answered.Martel clearly states that the problem as he sees it is that celebrities "sky-high" power is the problem, which I find rather ironic because all most "celebrity saints," want to help those who are hurting and suffering. Why is this such a bad thing to Martel? Does Ned Martel desire that celebrities use their "sky-high power" to abuse the public instead. This is a silly suggestion, I'm sure, but it does make one wonder when a great new television show that exalts the goodness of humanity is slammed because it uses celebrities, and in this case has a prominent Christian celebrity as its host.The other interesting comment in Martel's critique of Three Wishes is that he states that his wish is, ...that the town could have figured out how to stage such moments of support and catharsis without the arrival or blessings of a famous singer... much of these benefits could be accomplished without such a benefactor swooping into town.While I can understand the power of celebrity being an issue for Martel the problem I have with Martel's wish is that he does not provide his solution to the problem. How are hundreds or thousands of people in a town able to find out the wishes and needs of others in the town without some person of influence among them? Not all people read papers, and everyone doesn't listen to the news or even watch television. So what is the solution to the problem of celebrity? Martel fails miserably in giving a solid answer or even an ounce of an idea about how this can be accomplished.Martel also could've done well to dismiss the anti-religious commentary and comparison in his article as not to offend thousands of Christians or God loving people who appreciate the good work NBC has finally decided to do. My wish is that more people watch Three Wishes and are inspired to act in a manner that is helpful in building up, rather than tearing down. Martel might want to watch the show to learn a few lessons from those celebrities he has criticized for doing good. That's the example to follow and only the beginning of the solution, for him who has eyes to see. Edited: PC Culture37033@blogcritics.org Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:37:28 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/08/09/235656.php Stacy L Harp I am outraged at the unethical, lying and scheming jurors Eleanor Cook who is 79 and Ray Hultman who is 62 years old. These two "elders" should know better than to put their personal fame and love of fortune above children who have been violated sexually. According to a story from WPMI.com Eleanor has said, Eleanor Cook, 79, said immediately after Jackson's acquittal that she thought the singer may have molested other children, but not the accuser. Her book, titled "Guilty As Sin, Free As A Bird," is co-written by Larry Garrison (president of the book's publisher Silver Creek Entertainment) and Cook's granddaughter. Absolutely disgusting! So to this unethical granny it's okay to make money off of the pain of a child who she thinks may not have been molested by Jackson. It's sick.Yesterday on Nancy Grace's television show, Jane Velez-Mitchell said the following, Nancy, this is absolutely shocking and outrageous. Really disturbing stories about the jurors in the Michael Jackson case. The "New York Daily News" reports that two of the jurors who are writing books say that Michael Jackson, they believe, was guilty. And in fact, one of the books is even called, "Guilty as Sin, Free as a Bird." That is being written reportedly by 79-year-old juror Eleanor Cook. And she is said to outline a whole slew of juror misconduct. Get this. She says she snuck in a medical text right into jury deliberations in an attempt to show her fellow jurors that Michael Jackson fit the classic profile of a pedophile. But she also goes on to say that she literally winked -- winked -- at Katherine Jackson, Michael Jackson`s mother, in court. And they even exchanged wardrobe tips and got to the point that they were wearing the same color to court on certain days. But, Nancy, the most shocking and outrageous charge actually concerns you, because one juror reportedly snuck in a copy of a Court TV episode starring none other than yourself and your colleague, Diane Dimond. And the only reason they didn`t get it to play is they couldn`t get the VCR to work. Now, I spoke to a source today very closely connected to this case, and that person confirmed there was, in fact, and in-camera, in-chambers hearing about that last incident. All sides attended and apparently decided, since nobody actually saw that videotape of Court TV, they were not going to expel the juror who brought it in. But pretty amazing and shocking stuff. The other unethical juror, Ray Hultman, who is also money-hungry, is quoted as saying, Silver Creek is also publishing a book by juror Ray Hultman, 62, who said on ABC's Good Morning America following the trial that his vote to acquit "doesn't change my feelings that he probably has molested boys at some point." Hultman's book, "The Deliberator," will be co-written by former Jackson family friend and author Stacy Brown, who also co-wrote "The Man Behind the Mask" with Jackson's former publicist Bob Jones. Nancy Grace also played a clip of him the day the verdict came down on Jackson. Debra Opri, Nancy's guest said this:Number one, I`m disgusted, because two jurors admitted jury misconduct because they`re selling books. I spoke to Mr. Raymond Hultman the day of the verdict after he was on your show. And I said to him, "Thank you for the time you took to deliberate." And he said to me, quote, "Well, ma`am, the evidence just wasn`t there. We couldn`t have gone any other way." And then, two months later, this same man who seems to like the limelight from this case is out pandering a book. And he`s saying what he needs to say to get the book deal. Now, that "Daily News" article was a little incorrect. The bottom line is that there is juror misconduct and this citizen would like to see these two, at a minimum, go to jail for their misconduct. They have made American citizens look like scoundrels, unethical, money-hungry and unloving and uncaring about children who are being violated by celebrity. This is an outrage and something needs to be done.I will be following this story closely and will let you know what else I can find out. Culture33932@blogcritics.org Tue, 9 Aug 2005 23:56:56 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/17/195336.php Stacy L HarpLast night I went to a premier showing of the new summer hit The Perfect Man. The movie is being marketed this way, "Funny, fresh and full of surprises, The Perfect Man is a humorous story of love, longing and leaving and what can happen when good intentions go awry. At the story's heart is the romantic notion of finding the perfect partner...and on the not-so-romantic flipside is a portrait of a family that's just dealing with the ups and downs life brings while trying to stay together and stay put--at least, that's what the story's protagonist, teenager Holly Hamilton, is hoping for."While the above description is true of the movie I see the movie as more of a picture about a relationship with a mother and a daughter, than one about trying to find the perfect man. The mother, Jean, played by veteran television actress Heather Locklear, is the perfect example of a woman who has to find her identity in a man. She has one failed relationship after another and rather than deal with her disappointment and search out the reasons why she is failing in these relationships, she chooses to uproot her family and move to another town. This isn't the best way to parent your children. This gets old for the daughter Holly, played by Hilary Duff, as you see her blog about what it is like to be on the road all the time because her mother continues to run away, dragging her from place to place so that she can't even get close to someone and even go to a dance.Not surprisingly, the movie shows how the pattern of leaving to avoid intimacy begins to carry through into the daughter's way of thinking as she finds herself being cared for by a young man she goes to high school with.The movie is definitely a 21st century movie in that you see how people try to communicate via the Internet using both email and instant messenger technology. And the teen savy Holly even has her own weblog where she tells the world what is really happening in her life. This will appeal to just about anyone who loves the Internet and has chatted in a chat room at some point.On the downside, although not stated in clear terms saying, "I'm gay and you have to love me," this movie had a bartender character played by one of the fab five who was the standout flamboyant homosexual in the movie. I'm not sure what the point of having this gay character in the movie was, except to be politically correct, but it did nothing for the storyline. And sadly, the audience I was in really enjoyed the overt homosexual humor and just confirms how much Hollywood has been able to brainwash the public into believing that homosexuality is okay and normal and healthy. Research shows anything but.However, overall the movie was pretty good. Heather Locklear played a relatively conservative character, which is a stretch from her days on Melrose Place, and she brought some realism to the struggle that single mothers have. There were no inappropriate sexual overtones, unless you include the homosexual ones, and there was not one curse word in the whole movie.Hilary Duff played her teenage character well, and she did it with integrity and honesty. I appreciated that she ended up coming clean with her lies and that she was ultimately able to help her mother become the adult that she needed to be.This movie may have played better on television, but if you want to take a younger person to the movie and support Hollywood in their attempts to make a family picture, this would be a good movie to start with. Parents just be aware that you may have to explain the homosexual jokes to younger children who might not get the Village People humor. Video31201@blogcritics.org Fri, 17 Jun 2005 19:53:36 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/08/225125.php Stacy L HarpRecently I had the opportunity to read and review a very great book called Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity by Nancy Pearcey.If you've never read a book on worldview or apologetics, then you are in for a treat because this is just what the doctor ordered. Many books that are published in the Christian world are cotton ball fluff. Total Truth is the medicine, and Crossway Publishers hit the ball out of the park with this book.Pearcey's credentials no one can argue with. She is the Francis A. Schaeffer scholar at the World Journalism Institute where Total Truth serves as the basis for a worldview curriculum. She earned her M.A. from Covenant Theological Seminary and was pursuing a doctorate when she was blessed to have children. She does have other graduate level education in philosophy and she currently serves as the Visiting Scholar at the Torrey Honors Institute of Biola University. And you can read more of her bio and education here.In a nutshell, Total Truth addresses the idea of worldview and why it is important for Christians to carry their worldview into every area of their lives. Pearcey skillfully examines the ideas of the culture and explains why the definition of values and social contract theory are important to recognize and then engage.She masterfully lays out a critique of Western civilization and how we have fallen from where we were once called; and she gives a clarion call to the mass of Christians who need to learn to understand what they believe and why.Some chapter titles include: Darwin Meets the Berenstain Bears, The Science of Common Sense, What's So Good About Evangelicalism? and How Women Started the Culture War.She also has four appendices including one on Modern Islam and the New Age movement. And the footnotes are itself a small book.Total Truth has been selected as the Book of the Year by the High School Conservative Clubs of America, and it has also been used as the Book of the Month and in Sunday school classes.And the book has also been endorsed by just about every major scholar in the apologetic and Christian academic world.This is a must-read book, and it is a book you will return to over and over again. Google Print has also included some of the text of Pearcey's book on their site, so you can even go there and begin to get a taste of this masterpiece.If you do not read any book this year, this is the one book you MUST read. Do it today! More reviews can be found at Mind & Media: Publicity with Faith. Books30756@blogcritics.org Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:51:25 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/06/010615.php Stacy L HarpRecently a fellow blogger-ette wrote about her experience with bipolar disorder and how she "came out of the closet". And I found her comments interesting because even though it's 2005 it's amazing to me the stigma that mental health issues still have for some people.What I found ironic going through grad school though was that probably well over half of the students in the Clinical Psychology program I was in were on some type of medication for depression, anxiety or other mental health related issues.In fact, we had one professor say at one point that medication for mental health was soon going to be considered the equivalent of taking vitamins everyday.I'm not sure about that personally, but I can say that I'm never shocked when I'm told a friend of mine or even an acquaintance is on some form of medication for emotional help.Which is why I try to urge my clients to get evaluated for medication if they are having issues. But even in doing that, I've found clients are resistant because they are convinced that they are "crazy" if they go on medication!So to all of you out there who are taking some form of medication for mental health, I'm here to tell you that it is okay and nothing to be ashamed of. Keep taking the medication as long as it helps you and forget about what the others say who want to mock you or hurt you with their senseless words.If you'd like to learn more about medication I'd recommend the book below. Culture30599@blogcritics.org Mon, 6 Jun 2005 01:06:15 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/05/124412.php Stacy L Harp Today is the first year anniversary of the death of President Reagan. Please join me in praying for Nancy and the rest of the family.Michael Reagan wrote a column called, "A Year of Memories" it begins...This coming Sunday marks the first anniversary of my father's death, and I will mark it by visiting the aircraft carrier that bears his name, USS Ronald Reagan. At 8:00 a.m., with Captain Jim Symonds and the crew, I will lay a wreath in honor of my dad. As I get ready for that ceremony I think back over the past year and what I've learned as I traveled all across America on speaking engagements to different organizations and listened to thousands and thousands of my fellow Americans express their love and admiration for Ronald Reagan. As they shared with me their favorite Ronald Reagan stories or their favorite Ronald Reagan moments, I began to understand the reason why those vast crowds took the time last year to stand outside for hours upon hours just to be able to walk past my father's casket for a brief moment, whether it was at the Ronald Reagan Library at Simi Valley, Calif., or back in Washington at the Rotunda where he lay in state."Continue reading... Cartoon by Dan Lacey creator of Faithmouse Politics30582@blogcritics.org Sun, 5 Jun 2005 12:44:12 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/03/192148.php Stacy L HarpLast night I had the honor of being the guest of Grace Hill Media at a premier showing of the hot new movie Cinderella Man, starring outstanding actors Russell Crowe & Renee Zellweger.When I arrived at the theater, to be honest, I wasn't thrilled with the idea of seeing a "boxing" movie, however, within the first few minutes of Cinderella Man I was drawn in by the outstanding story. The movie is set primarily in the 1930's during the Great Depression and draws you into what it must have been like for hard working people to experience the loss of just about everything even though they were hard working.I was captivated to see the love of a family where a father figure not only showed a tough side because of his boxing career, but also a very tender side as he gives his child his food to eat because she is still hungry.Crowe did a superb job of conveying integrity, sensitivity and masculinity throughout the whole movie. Zellweger also gives an outstanding performance as a depression era wife who desires to please and support her husband, but also has a mind of her own.However, one of the stand outs in this movie is the supporting actor, Paul Giamatti, who plays Crowe's manager Joe Gould. All throughout the film you see his character encouraging, Crowe's character, Jim Braddock, and even learn that he was hiding his own poverty in order to support and encourage someone he truly believes in, despite the boss hogs in the boxing industry.Ron Howard did an outstanding job producing this film and bringing back to Hollywood and the public, a movie the whole family can enjoy.The movie is rated PG-13 due to the violent boxing scenes and some explicit language including the use of the Lord's name being taken in vain. Parents would do well to accompany their children to this movie especially if they are under 13.Go see the movie this weekend and bring some Kleenex. Video30531@blogcritics.org Fri, 3 Jun 2005 19:21:48 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/02/104636.php Stacy L Harp Last week World Net Daily did a story on Prophet Yahweh who summoned a UFO for television cameras. However, if you do a little research on Ramon Watkins, the prophets real name, you will find that he has a desire to meet his "African-American Queen."In a plea to Yahoo readers, on their personals page, Ramon Watkins asks, "Where is My African-American Queen?" To see what he will promise his lucky girl, if she decides to contact him for a date, please read here.What I find amazing about this, assuming it is really true, and not someone playing a cruel joke on Ramon, is that if this guy honestly thinks he will be able to do all the things he says he will in his begging for a girl piece, then why has he been divorced?And why is he out of a job? He even admits that he is "unemployed" and an "entertainer." Yet, somehow he manages to make over $150,000.Plus, if he was so great at being a husband before then why is he divorced?I think instead of summoning UFO's for the cameras, he might want to go to therapy. Culture30469@blogcritics.org Thu, 2 Jun 2005 10:46:36 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/01/105848.php Stacy L HarpRecently I posted a real life incident that happened to me as my car was vandalized by an apparent "heterosexual hater" of traditional marriage. And it was obvious to me that the culprit was part of the gay activist crowd because of the rainbow sticker plastered over my pro-family bumper sticker.I raised the question if the tables had been turned and I plastered a Christian or pro-traditional marriage bumper sticker over their rainbow would it be considered a hate crime. Read the story here.Today I would like to share with you a first hand account I had at a Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network event a few years ago. I was attending this event, as a favor to a pro-family group. In essence I was incognito because GLSEN is too afraid to tape their conferences and make the contents available to the public. The reason, I believe, is because if the public actually heard the hate and intention to wreck the childhoods of innocent children themselves, then GLSEN would be shut down in a heart beat.I attended a workshop about how to intimidate Christians on campus. And I'm not making this up. In this workshop there was an hour long discussion on how to use intimidation on the school campus in case their message was being ignored or hindered.The case in point is using signs to promote either a gay straight alliance club or some other event promoting a homosexual tolerance event. Most schools have policies about advertising about club events, and yet the gay activists were telling this classroom of people how to get around the policies.In fact, they encouraged tearing down Christian club signs and then plastering their gay straight alliance signs in their place. However, here is the intimidation technique they taught at the seminar.Instead of simply posting their sign for the club, advertising their event, what they instructed the teachers and children in attendance to do was write another sign that said, "You've just committed a hate crime" and place that sign underneath their club sign. Thus, the intimidation tactic.In essence, the gay straight alliance club was told by GLSEN to ignore school rules on how to post a club sign, and they were told to put a hateful and intolerant message, which is a lie, underneath their sign, "in the event that sign was taken down."Now the issue isn't the sign being taken down because of the school policy. They played the tolerance fiddle that says, "who cares about the rules and school policies because if you take my club sign down then you committed a hate crime".In other words, the activists at GLSEN encouraged their students and teachers to break the rules, and use intimidation in their posting of signs in order to spread their message.Instead of simply sticking to school policy.Now you tell me, why doesn't GLSEN tape their conferences so parents and the public can listen any time they want?Simple, they are teaching hateful intolerance, how to break the law and the are engaging in criminal activity by intentionally promoting intimidation.If a Christian club did this, we would be booked on a hate crime. Culture30421@blogcritics.org Wed, 1 Jun 2005 10:58:48 EDT