To Nike or Not to Nike: Police, Priests & Paradigms

I have been trying to process our national response to the new Nike ad campaign. My own gut reaction was to ignore it. Cashing in on the protest seemed to cheapen the message, but since kneeling has somehow led to the end of his career, I don't feel I should complain about him finding another source of income, so I shrugged and went on with my day.

Then people started burning their Nikes.

Let me take a step back and get a wider view. I see so much division in our nation right now. Words seem to have taken on new meanings depending on which side is talking so that just as in the story of the tower of Babel, confusion and misunderstanding are driving us apart.

In this specific case the split seems to come from the question of who's lives are worth defending. The left says "black lives matter," and the right hears "officers lives don't matter." So the right responds "blue lives matter," and the left hears "minority lives don't matter." This leaves both sides rightly (at least in their understanding) defending their positions saying:

 "THAT'S NOT WHAT WE SAID!"

Just as when Colin Kaepernick sat down with Army Green Beret Nate Boyer, I truly believe that if we could slow down and listened to each other most of us would find that we really do agree on more than we imagine.

How so?

Perhaps it will help by starting with a separate situation, one I'm 99.9% sure both sides agree on: abusive priests. Neither side approves of pedophiles taking advantage of their position as priests to hurt children! Of course from the outside looking in, it's a lot easier to accept that priests are corruptible and to even go a step further and start seeing all priests as dangerous and untrustworthy. 

From inside the church it's so much harder to believe that leaders you know, you see regularly, you trust to administer communion and hear your confessions, perform your weddings could possibly be (or be covering for) such monsters! Surely the authorities would deal with abusers and justly punish them and remove them from situations where they could abuse again! 

But no, in hindsight, they did not do that. Instead they hushed the accusations and shuffled the abusers to places that were unaware of the the truth, other states, other countries, other vulnerable children.

Back to the topic at hand, I think statistically (correct me if I'm wrong) those on the right are more likely to have good trustworthy relationships with police officers. They are family, neighbors, fellow church members, and so on. When the left says "police brutality is a real problem," the right says, "my dad isn't brutal, my neighbor isn't racist, my daughter is working for the good of our community and would never take a life without it being absolutely necessary, my friend gave his life in the line of duty!" It is so personal and thus so hard to imagine that trusted organizations wouldn't justly deal with abusers who step across the line of decency.

On the left side of the "debate" are those who've lost sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, brothers, friends, and teachers to officers who claimed to fear for their own lives, but then watch news reports where white mass shooters are arrested calmly, taken to burger king on the way to the police station, and so forth. The officers who seem to casually take minority lives so often get minimal consequences and if they are thrown off one force may be hired to police another community where their past actions aren't known.

Do you see the parallels? 

In both cases, abusive priests and abusive officers, wouldn't it be better for everyone if the "bad apples" were dealt with correctly and barred from ever being in a place of authority where they could damage another life? And, when they aren't given serious consequences for lives destroyed, doesn't it suggest that those in the administration may also be rotten?

If your loved one is a police officer, do you want them working along side officers who take innocent lives, who rape women, who plant evidence at investigations? Isn't calling out such atrocities the correct response? Doesn't sweeping it under the rug or letting them off with a slap on the wrist put your loved ones lives in danger? If the community cannot trust the police department in their neighborhood, why would they trust that your father, daughter, friend or cousin is an honest officer truly there to help them? Don't both sides have a common interest in holding the police accountable?

When I saw that The National Black Police Association responded to the current controversy  saying:

 “Kaepernick’s stance is in direct alignment with what law enforcement stands for—the protection of a people, their human rights, their dignity, their safety, and their rights as American citizens,” 

I was thrilled. It is a statement of the common interests of both sides!

Then I saw the that The National Association of Police Organizations is "calling on all our member officers, their families and friends to join in boycotting all Nike products," I was left reeling!

For those of you boycotting the NFL or burning your Nikes, let me see if I can explain the feeling of betrayal this letter evokes in me. I get the same sinking pain in my gut as when I read that Catholic League President Bill Donohue defended the Catholic Church saying:

“There is no on-going crisis—it’s a total myth,” he writes. “In fact, there is no institution, private or public, that has less of a problem with the sexual abuse of minors today than the Catholic Church.”

Really?He's defending them? 

Don't stick up for abusers, don't defend those who take innocent lives, or tase 11 year old girls! I truly don't believe my friends and family knowingly support this behavior. Surely we can come to agreement if we just take a step back and listen!

-------------------------------------------------

Update: When looking up links last night I ran across one heartbreaking story that I can't get out of my mind. 

Sadly, I think it illustrates my point perfectly. Just as minorities are often told to "stop making things up,"  "stop resisting," "do as you're told," "the police are there to help you," this child was told not to lie about the priest and sent to be counseled by his abuser!

'Instead, [of believing him] he said, his behavior was dismissed, shrugged off by parents and teachers labeling him a “bad kid.” 

"And they were kind of happy that I was spending time with a priest, ya know — like he'd be the one to straighten me out." 

'Nobody will believe you' 

He hit his breaking point when he was about 13 years old. 

An argument after detention led to him telling his parents what Brzyski was doing to him, and had been doing to him for years. 

His parents didn’t believe him though. 

“You don’t lie about a priest like that,” Delaney father's said as he slapped his son across the face.  

“They didn’t know what to do with me.” 

Delaney said his parents did reach out to the priest after his confession to them. However, it wasn’t to protect him like he had hoped, and said he needed.

They asked his abuser to counsel him — “their son was troubled,” giving Brzyski even more access to him. 

So Delaney went to counseling.  

With the man who had been raping him.'

It may take a huge paradigm shift to see those we trust as possibly not worthy of the faith we've placed on them, but let us, as a nation, listen to those who tell us they are being abused. Let us weed out the abusers from those meant to be helpers.

-------------------------------------------------

I welcome your comments, but reserve the right to delete any that cross the line of decency.

Turning Thirteen Part III

My youngest will be a teenager tomorrow!!

You have filled this last chapter of parenting with music: singing yourself to sleep as a baby (you were over the lullabies before you could talk,) humming during circle time in preschool, teaching yourself piano songs before we found your beloved teacher. We've been given so many "concerts" throughout the years!! Now, on the last day of childhood, tallest in the family, developing your talents, I'm excited to see what adventures await!

________________
My first teenager.
My second teenager.

Women's Ordination Debate "Pink and Blue"

I really think this needs to be spread far and wide!

"Despite the fact that the word for helper, Ezer, is most often used in the Bible to describe God as our helper (and never used to describe animals as our helpers), when Piper and Grudem read Genesis 2 and find the word helper applied to the woman, they toss out the sweeping human identity statement of Genesis 1 where woman, just like man, fully bears God’s image and is fully called to fruitfulness and rulership. Instead, they banish woman from the man’s side and place her alongside the animals. She loses her place among the rulers and must join the ruled."

You can read the rest here by downloading the PDF of Hermeneutics in pink and blue from CBE International. Here is their statement on equality: statement on men, women, and biblical equality !



Here's more of what caught my eye:

• “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him” (N I V). Thus, even as they have adjusted the woman’s identity, they would have to adjust the man’s identity to fit this revelation of his inadequacy as the “not-good-one,” indeed, as the “help-less” one.

  

• The promise of salvation is not simply that we escape from the wrath of God, but that we receive empowerment and transformation for the present life. We are restored to our calling as Genesis 1 image-bearers. Hence, 1 Peter 2:9 defines the renewed identity of believers as “a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation.” The Bible speaks of all this transformation and empowerment as offered to believers without any qualification by gender. Yet, for traditionalists, while a male’s renewal in Christ leads, at least potentially, to offices of authority within the church, renewal for females does not.

• Parable of the talents: Under female subordinationism, the parable requires an implied footnote reminding women that under certain circumstances God would be offended by females who exercise their teaching and leadership talents. Only for a male audience can the parable stand as written.

  

• Is this what God had in mind when the oneness of Adam became the oneness of male and female? Is this what Paul had in mind when he wrote 1 Timothy 2:12? Are we truly not a single human race in two sexes, but rather two distinct human races?

• The bedrock of our human identity is given to both males and females in Genesis 1. Nothing that follows in Scripture—neither specific behavioral directives such as 1 Timothy 2, nor regulations concerning existing social orders and structures such as slavery, polygamy, or patriarchy—redefines our original, God-given, human identity.

• While the full humanity of Genesis 1 has been allowed to define maleness, tragically, it has been stripped away—systematically and relentlessly—from females. Under some theologies we are left with barely enough humanity to make a single rib.

Update: Found a list of articles shared in Facebook.  

 

I have not yet checked out all the links, but here's a quote from the article by Carl Cosaert of Walla Walla:

"A plain reading of the passage reveals that Paul is not speaking about church leadership and authority, or ordination. He is talking about the way women should relate to their husbands. The passage says nothing about the headship of all men over all women. If anything, the passages affirms not only the right of women to pray in public, but also to prophesy, which is a form of teaching."

The original post from Facebook:

...here are some links I posted half a year ago. Lots of good resources there:

RESOURCES ABOUT WOMEN IN MINISTRY

The worldwide study in the Adventist church of the theology of ordination and women as leaders and pastors has created a lot of discussions, and several people write to me asking for more resources.

There is now a preponderance of excellent Adventist material showing why God is calling both men and women as leaders and pastors. Here is a small selection:

My own paper for the Inter-American Division discusses Luke-Acts and shows how the current SDA practice of ordination is based on ecclesiastical needs at the time and does not flow directly from the New Testament:

• http://www.vetne.com/pdf/ReimarVetne_Ordination_LukeActs.pdf

Actually, our practice of ordination (particularly the way ordination is understood and argued by those against women's ordination) is more indebted to medieval Catholic theology than to Scripture, as Darius Jankiewicz of Andrews University demonstrated (a rather long video, but watch at least the first hour, you will not regret it):

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScKb3teILmI

The North-American Division has produced a great collection of exegetical and theological papers, all but one are in favor of women in leadership:

• http://nadordination.com/s/nad-ordination-2013-fl4u.pdf

Carl Cosaert of Walla Walla summarized well some of the arguments in favor of women in ministry at the recent Annual Council:

• http://www.adventistreview.org/church-news/theology-of-ordination-position-no.-2

Virtually all the professors of Andrews University, the leading theological institution of Adventism, have rejected the concept of "masculine headship" (a doctrine espoused by many who are against women in leadership):

 

• In English: http://www.andrews.edu/sem/9-19-14-updated_web_version-unique_headship_of_christ_final.pdf

 

• In Spanish: http://www.andrews.edu/sem/9-19-14-updated_unique_headship_of_christ_final_-_spanish.pdf

Actually, the masculine headship concept is a new theology in Adventist circles, originating in the 80s with Bacchiocchi who was influenced by certain Calvinist headship-theologians. The history of the new headship concept in Adventism is summarized well by Gerry Chudleigh (Pacific Union Conference):

• http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/433232

Jon Paulien, one of Adventism's leading New Testament scholars, explains why he rejects the male headship doctrine:

• http://revelation-armageddon.com/2014/10/headship-theology/

Ellen White and the Adventist pioneers had to deal with many of the arguments against women preachers a hundred years ago (since Ellen White was a female preacher and leader). Martin Hanna (Andrews University) and Cindy Tutsch (Ellen G. White Estate) have gathered many of Ellen White's statements, as well as important biblical passages in favor of women pastors in a useful book published by Pacific Press:

• https://www.facebook.com/questionsandanswersaboutwomensordination

When all is said and done, God must be allowed to be God and have the prerogative to call whoever He wants to whatever ministry He chooses. This is not about "women's rights" as much as it is about God's rights, as Kessia Reyne Bennett reminds us:

• http://www.moves-removes.com/home/2014/10/15/women-in-ministry-not-our-rights-but-his

To My Dear Atheist Friends & My Dear Christian Friends

To my dear Atheist friends,

I don't believe in that god either.

 To my dear Christian friends,

Do you?

~~~

I hear of a god
who is in control
who laid out rules for a righteous life
who warns us to
obey
and pray
lest we should stray away
and end in
HELL
one day
where we'll repent of all
our wicked ways
but it will be
too late
to escape
a fiery fate
of torment
and JUSTICE
without end!

I hear of a god 

who is in control

of blessings that 

he will bestow

IF

you pay your tithe

and say your prayers
and dress the way
the leaders say
and teach your children
with whom to play

and claim your promises

of...

prosperity?

A car?

Of course!

A house?

You must!

A boat? 

God wants your happiness,

so yes!

And those that live in poverty?

They obviously live in sin

harboring some evil 

deep within.

If only they would change their wicked ways 

they'd live in 

mansions 

the rest of their days! 

I hear of a god

who is in control 

and chooses sides

and likes football

a god who sends out 

troops to war.

The soldiers
hold their weapons,

say a prayer

then meet 

on land

or sea

or air

while leaders claim

god's enterprise

then slaughter those 

on the 

other side

making
history 
where ever 
they may be: 

the City of Ai,

Constantinople,

Wounded Knee.

 I cannot trust

a god who

is in control

of all the horrors

this world holds!

Yet...

I believe!

I believe that

somehow

someone

divided energy

by a constant

 squared

 and

"...the laws of physics....govern the 

something-from-nothing moment 

of creation that gives rise to our universe.."

>>BANG<<

atoms flew

and gasses grew

and strings

so infinitesimally small

began to

sing

of molecules

and gravity

and

the gathering

of galaxies

and mountains

bursting

from the seas

and tidal pools

and a gentle breeze...

But I believe 

a challenger

declared,

"I know a better,

stronger way!

Let might make right

and strength survive and thrive

while weakness filters out and dies:

let power beget power...

The circle of life!"

I believe

that in this world,

so full of strife,

a spark of love

was kept alive

and wove its way

through centuries

and one day

 faced the enemy

who offered

to release control

of his whole earthly realm

if only love

would bend
it's knee

declaring 

the usuper's
victory.

But,

Love was not

so easily bought

and though I cannot truly

comprehend

how death 

could bring life

in the end

yet, oh, how bold

to tell us that

the last

shall one day

be the first

and 

meekness triumph
in the end.

 I believe that

Love is patient

Love is kind

and

God IS Love!

Which means that:

God is patient

God is kind
God does not envy
 God is not proud
 God is not

easily angered
and keeps
no record
of wrongs.
God never ends,
but prophesies
and knowledge
they
will pass away!*

I believe
this challenges
theology that tells
us that most
mystery is gone
and we've
deciphered prophecy

and formulated
the way to be.
Instead
we dimly see
through darkened glass
but hear repeatedly:

"Fear not!

Be not afraid.

Love your neighbor

AND

your enemy,

for that's what matters,

in the end,

to Me!" 

 ~Heather Alarcon

1/20/2014

------------------------------------------------

Although I haven't blogged in a VERY long time, this is the first part of a series of blogs I hope to write that are partially in response to Ryan Bell's foray into Atheism and were partly brought on by a news item similarly to my first post.  I will explain more details on point later, but when I started writing down ideas my prose turned into poetry and it became what it is. ^_^

*I  first heard of substituting God for Love in 1 Corinthians 13 from someone who heard it at the Spangle, WA Camp-meeting 2013.  I believe it is a beautiful and meaningful exercise.

Occupy..WHY?

So, it's been a while since I took the time to write a blog.  I've heard they're old news..."everything happens on twitter now," so I guess I'm going old-school!  ^_^ 

I'm having some pretty varied reactions to the current protests across the country and even the world.  Part of me really wants to drop everything and join in to change the world, but I've got a family to take care of, so that's really out of the question.  Another part of me fears that it is just what the Republicans needed to draw votes away from dissillusioned Obama and slip one of their own into power.  But, I heard someone on the radio talking about how polarizing the two party system is and I began to see that the movement of the "99%" is an attempt to move beyond the limitations of left vs. right.

  from Occupy Tri-Cities (Richland, WA) taken by Jeremy Peterson

I'm having some pretty varied reactions to the current protests across the country and even the world.  Part of me really wants to drop everything and join in to change the world, but I've got a family to take care of, so that's really out of the question.  Another part of me fears that it is just what the Republicans needed to draw votes away from dissillusioned Obama and slip one of their own into power.  But, I heard someone on the radio talking about how polarizing the two party system is and I began to see that the movement of the "99%" is an attempt to move beyond the limitations of left vs. right. 

Unfortunately, when I speak with others about the Occupy movement, the theme of the responses seems to mostly be, "Those unenployed hippies don't even know what they want!" So as an employed part of the 99% I hope to lend my voice to clarifying the message.

• First and formost:

GET THE MONEY OUT OF POLITICS!!!

Right around minute 2 Dylan Ratigan states: "Your congress is a bought congress!" His emotion filled point really hits home for me.  Iin my mind embodies the "one demand" and I'm not alone.  It has already been clipped and added to this video:

Occupy Wall Street Our One Demand



So, this leads to the obvious question of HOW?

These 5 steps recommended by Matt Taibbi would make a good start:

My Advice to the Occupy Wall Street Protesters

Hit bankers where it hurts:

1. Break up the monopolies! They are above the law and above market consequence, making them more dangerous and unaccountable than a thousand mafias combined.
2. Pay for your own bailouts!A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives would generate enough revenue to pay us back for the bailouts, and still have plenty left over to fight the deficits...
3. No public money for private lobbying!A company that receives a public bailout should not be allowed to use the taxpayer's own money to lobby against him. (Or better yet, in my opinion, no lobbying at all!)
4. Tax hedge-fund gamblers!We need an immediate repeal of the preposterous and indefensible carried-interest tax break, which allows hedge-fund titans to pay taxes of only 15 percent on their billions in gambling income, while ordinary Americans pay twice that...
5. Change the way bankers get paid!We need new laws preventing Wall Street executives from getting bonuses upfront for deals that might blow up in all of our faces later.

Still think it doesn't matter to you? Still identify more with this hardworking young man?

How does Max Udargo's response to him sound?

Do you really want the bar set this high? Do you really want to live in a society where just getting by requires a person to hold down two jobs and work 60 to 70 hours a week? Is that your idea of the American Dream?

Do you really want to spend the rest of your life working two jobs and 60 to 70 hours a week? Do you think you can? Because, let me tell you, kid, that’s not going to be as easy when you’re 50 as it was when you were 20.

And what happens if you get sick?

My uncle has been saying for years that "THEY" want to turn us into a third world country, I really didn't believe him, it sounded too far fetched, but then a conservative friend of mine shared an article:

Costa Rica 

Libertarian Paradise

 I’ve left my country, because I can’t take the Socialist slant anymore, and I am so tired of the regulations that make it almost impossible to do business in the U.S.

[Here in Costa Rica] the roads are barely wide enough to allow two cars through, yet buses and trucks manage the turns all day. I even saw an amazingly adept chicken cross the road. In six hours, seeing dozens of intersections, I saw zero STOP signs, one blinking red signal light, no ridiculous “slippery when wet” or “dangerous curves” signs, no highly paid DOT workers standing around with signs that say “SLOW” and of course, no highway marker signs or street name signs. Somehow, 5 million people manage to navigate a country a little smaller than West Virginia with barely a touch from the government.

I'm sure Costa Rica is a lovely country, but that's not what I planned for my children's future! As my brother said this morning, "I don't want to be a peasant!" and I don't want a large majority of Americans to be peasants either! 

So, if you do have a job, hold onto it, but don't look down on those who have been unable to find work, and take to the streets to make their frustrations heard.  As this sign illustrates, many may be only a layoff away from joining them! 

Why are the protesters occupying Wall Street, DC, or any other locations around the country?

To preserve the American Dream by getting money out of politics!

...the end of the world as we know it....?

...the end of the world as we know it....?, a gallery on Flickr.

Growing up in a church with its roots directly springing from the Great Dissapointment of 1844, I am both horrified and somehow captivated to see history repeating itself. Personally I do anticipate the "new heaven and new earth" with joy, but I believe that it is very dangerous to presume to understand the all the details. It leads to such terrible situations including mass suicides and/or abandoning families to follow cult leaders.

My heart aches for those whose hearts may be broken if nothing happens today (May 21, 2011) and at the same time I wonder if something may happen to encourage end time theories. Ultimately, I do wonder at our human capacity to ignore that which we don't want to see.

I have chosen these amazing images to go with texts from Matthew and Revelation that I feel are pertinent to today's doomsday predictions.

If you enjoy the images please click over and leave some love for the artists who captured them.

Why do the good die young?

I thought my husband was joking when he told me Kirchner had passed away:

"A patriot has died," congressman Juan Carlos Dante Gullo said on the state-run Vision 7 TV network. "Argentina has lost one of its best men."

I'm in shock!

Turning Thirteen II

Turning Thirteen!
Originally uploaded by gehmflor.

My second son
serious
silly
strongly rooting
for right
against wrong
for justice
and mercy
the world
around

May your teen years
now started
continue
to strengthen
and sharpen
these quality traits
as you grow
and become
a brave hearted
man!

____________________________

(My first teenager.)

Responsibility

[Remains of the Blue Mountain Mall / Strip Mall]

I am not exactly sure which word accurately describes the way I am feeling regarding the current state of Health Care Reform in our country right now. Perhaps fatigued is the closest. I am very excited by the historic passing of "the bill" but it was nowhere near the change I believe we so desperately need, and so far beyond what Americans on the other side of the political spectrum are willing to accept. I am tired, so tired, of the division among my fellow countrymen!

"In the eyes of way too many far-right Republicans, this is a war. They believe the Obama administration, progressives, liberals and Democrats are destroying America and replacing it with some sort of weird Brundlefly composed of communism, socialism, Maoism, Nazism and -- shock horror! --social justice. (Bob Cesca)"

I believe that the hardest issue to overcome is our inability to examine facts from the other's point of view. So, I return to an illustration I've used before and make the claim that there is, in fact, only one truth but that our examination of that truth from different angles leads us to see different realities.

Originally uploaded by ssj_george.

For instance, lets say we are all looking at Rodin's Thinker (or at least copies of said statue.) Our points of view may be different, but like the statue, reality itself cannot be shifted by our narrow vision.

USA-JULY08: Rodin's "The Thinker"
Originally uploaded by Kenneth McN.

Each side has focused on their own particular angle and sees only what is in their particular point of view.

For example, the Republican and Libertarian call for fiscal responsiblitiy focuses on the absolute truth that our nation is seriously in debt up over our heads! How could we possibly fund healthcare? (And why would we?)

But, did their point of view, perhaps, keep them from seeing the big picture?

"This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none.

Could a deal have been reached? Who knows? But we do know that the gap between this plan and traditional Republican ideas is not very big. The Obama plan has a broad family resemblance to Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts plan. It builds on ideas developed at the Heritage Foundation in the early 1990s that formed the basis for Republican counter-proposals to Clintoncare in 1993-1994.

Barack Obama badly wanted Republican votes for his plan. Could we have leveraged his desire to align the plan more closely with conservative views? To finance it without redistributive taxes on productive enterprise – without weighing so heavily on small business – without expanding Medicaid? Too late now. (David Frum)"

all in the details
Originally uploaded by Doubletee.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle have we been hyper focused on the enormity of need our country has for fair access to health care?The heartbreaking experiences of families who have lost loved ones due to inadequate medical attention makes it hard for those of us who are focused on this angle to consider the practical cost of helping those in need.

Just like the mall mess featured above, we cannot only have idealistic plans to meet everyone's needs. We must also be sure we can pay for them so that we don't end up with a half finished mess. But this cannot be looked at in a vacuum. Step back and look at the big picture! If people are healthier, they can be more productive. If they are more productive they could earn more money, If they earn more money, they will pay more taxes, which will help pay for Health Care reform!

I also find it more than a little hypocritical for conservatives to throw the blame for debt at our feet, Clinton left our country with a balanced budget. That balance seemed, in my eyes, to disappear into the black hole of war funding during the Bush administration. Still, I do think that progressives could and should focus more clearly on demonstrating the fiscal responsibility of the policies we champion:

"... Democrats need to clearly show that they're standing up to greed run amuck and saving a disappearing middle class, not taking control of people and redistributing wealth...(Kathleen Reardon)

Watcher
Originally uploaded by Alex T_SF.

But, how do we, as a nation with such polarizing points of view, act responsibly for the future of our country? Certainly not with the violence that is currently boiling up! Certainly not by calling each other liars!

I long for us to set aside our distracting differences, step back from our narrow emotional points of view and look outside the box for new angles and creative solutions to our nation's needs!

But I fear that it is too late!

----------------------------------------------------

One other thought, I have been wondering about the situation with the constitutionality lawsuit. If progressives had been able to maintain the "public option" would it have negated the issue with mandating citizens to purchase service from a private company?

(BTW - Conservatives are not the only ones concerned the possibility of the government overstepping it's bounds!)

---------------------Update-----------------------

I just saw that David Frum may have been fired for the article I quoted above: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1352