The lede of this TechnologyReview.com article says enough:

This month, NTT Labs, the research and development wing of Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation, plans to start conducting field trials for a radical new "human area networking" technology called RedTactont that uses the naturally-occurring electrical fields of human skin to transmit data.

Apple's new operating system, nicknamed "Tiger," is officially on sale today, and I already have it installed. Let me tell you: it's a treat.

It has numerous more features and tweaks then I could list here, so I'll concentrate on two particularly superb ones, I've found myself using with some frequency.

The first is Spotlight, Apple's new searching utility. As can be seen in the figure below, Spotlight is activated by clicking it's magnifying glass in the screen's upper-right corner. Type in a word or words, and Spotlight finds every file with that word in its title or inside the file itself, and it displays the top several hits, organized by file type. But get this. Spotlight also searches the text of e-mail messages, IM logs, photo meta information, etc. etc. And all Spotlight searches are nearly instant.



The second feature I wish to highlight is Dashboard. It allows a computer user to keep dozens of useful and repetitive functions available at the press of one key. Functions, such as address book, calendar, world clocks, stock prices, stickies, weather, etc., appear as graphical widgets that can be organized on the screen. These widgets are all in the same application layer and normally hidden from the user until he presses F12, and then everything goes darker and the widgets pop up on top of everything else. In the figure you can see some of the widgets I have open on my Mac:

Open-blogging on DC until May 11. Courtesy law finals...

Here are some of the significant legislative developments in Indiana from the last several days:

First, after a no-vote earlier in the day, the Indiana House voted at 11:36 p.m. in favor of enacting Daylight Savings Time in the state (51-46). One must wonder how Mitch Daniels persuaded those two votes to switch in such a short span. Either he made some sort of political threat to the switch-overs or he kissed some serious butt. I suspect the latter. Now the Federal Department of Transportation will hold hearings on whether certain parts or all of the state should change to the Central time zone.

The General Assembly also passed a measure increasing the speed limit on Indiana's rural highways, and it awaits Daniels' inevitable signature. The bill would raise the speed limit on certain stretches of interstate from 65 to 70, on some four-lane divided highways from 55 to 60, and on certain divided and limited access highways from 55 to 65. Though the law would authorize the increases to take effect July 1, the state must first conduct road review studies, which could take a few months.

Finally, the Indianapolis city council voted 18 to 11 against a measure that would have banned private employers from discriminating against employees based on their sexual orientation. The proposal would have excluded churches and certain non-profit entities from its effect. Nothing quite like a little pro-discrimination to bring our city council together.

Now, even as an ardent PC user, and as much as it pains me to admit it to Luke, I have to admit that I use Apple's iTunes to play mp3s. I can't help it; it's too pretty. One of my favorite features is the Smart Playlists, especially the Top 25 Most Played one that comes pre-loaded when you install the program. Is anyone else obsessed with this? I hope it's not just me. I find it very interesting to discover which songs I've listened to the most over the past year. For example, did you know I've listened to New Slang by The Shins 98 times since November 21st, when I first downloaded it? It's definitely No. 1 with a bullet on the list, followed by Margaret Yang's Theme from the Rushmore Soundtrack, Here Comes Your Man by The Pixies, and Such Great Heights by the Postal Service. Anyone else care to share their top songs?

I found it unusually hard to find something to blog about today. Until, that is, I thought I'd stop and watch CNN for a bit. You know, see how the "other half" lives. (According to the ratings, it's probably close to the "other quarter".

The program in question was Judy Woodruff's "Inside Politics", just your typical television pundit offering mindless analysis in place of actual journalism. But I'm fine with that. It's on at 3:30 p.m., so I'm not expecting gold. What made me laugh out loud was their little segment they've started recently called "Inside the Blogs".

Now, get ready to call me a misgynostic pig. Ok?

The two women they have running this segment are utterly and completely devoid of any possibility of coherent thought. One of them is from Australia, or some other non-English speaking country in the southern hemisphere, so you can't understand her at all. The other isn't even worthy of the title of "info-babe"; nothing of what came out of her mouth could somehow be construed as informative

But aside from the people they have running this segment, the whole concept upon which it is built fails to understand and appreciate the fundamental premise of blogging: that there is a direct, unencumbered, unfiltered exchange of information between the blogger and the reader. CNN puts these women on television to pick out what blogs they like, and then to pick out what parts of what blogs they like, and then to partially quote from what parts of what blogs they like. After that evisceration of text, they then proceed to do what members of the media are trained to do: tell us what it all means.

Oh thank you, CNN! I was scared of all those words on the screen!

It destroys the purpose of blogs if all people get out of them is a 2-minute, soundbite-filled coffee-talk segment between tweedle-dum and tweedle-moron. We don't need pundits to tell us what bloggers mean, or what blogs are worth reading today. The fact that CNN and Co. don't get it is shown by their falling viewership numbers, their inability to dictate what is and is not news, and the loss of their monopoly over information.

They are trying to capitalize on the success of blogs, while maintaining their disdain for the premise upon which all blogs are based: that a one need not be in possession of a journalism degree to able to have an opinion.

I have already written a post in January regarding the REAL ID Act, in particular arguing that making it illegal for immigrants to obtain drivers licenses does little to secure the United States against a future terrorist attack. Although not all of DC's readers agreed with me, I understand the argument that illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed to have US drivers licenses. However, several other problems about the REAL ID Act remain. While the key feature of the REAL ID Act is the denial of driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, the act itself is a piece of bad policy.

First of all, this act is a nightmare for state governments. The REAL ID Act would require state governments to set up new computer systems for issuing secure driver's licenses. It would require them to get security clearance for state Department of Motor Vehicle employees. It would require them to verify, with the issuing agency, the validity of each document an applicant offers for a license. And yes, the Real ID Act would require motor vehicle employees in all 50 states to verify the immigration status of applicants. If it passes, the Real ID Act could cause delays in motor vehicle registry offices as states scramble to meet the new requirements. Residents of states that fail to comply could find that their licenses are useless as IDs at airports, grounding people unless they have passports to use as identification. And to top it off, it is unfunded by the federal government.

Second, The Real ID Act also demands more proof from asylum seekers. Government officials could ask for "corroborating evidence" from the country of origin, including written documents. This is overkill. Many victims of torture and abuse are unlikely to be able to provide such evidence, especially if they come from countries where law enforcement officials are blind to, or complicit in, abuses. Do you think Milosevic wrote notes to Kosovars? "Dear Mr. _____, we are going to kill you." Supporters of the REAL ID Act argue that this is to prevent false claims of asylum, but under current law this hardly ever happens. People who claim persecution and apply for asylum generally either enter the country legally or make the claim as they face deportation. If they have a legal visa, there is no reason to detain them, and if they face deportation, they are already in custody.

The REAL ID Act also grants judges the ability to deny asylum based on subjective reasoning such as lack of eye contact or what the judge deems as bad attitude. Additionally, if a person could not tell the airport security guard or person who detained them why and how they were being mistreated in their home country but later tells the judge, then the judge can dismiss their claim of asylum. For example, if a woman was raped by soldiers in her home country and didn't or couldn't describe the rape to the person who detained her but then told it to the judge, then her claim could be dismissed. The bill also allows the government to deport people back to their home country even if their asylum claim is currently under consideration.

The bill would also hurt long-time permanent residents: The Real ID Act would make noncitizens, including long-time permanent residents, deportable for past lawful speech or associations. This strips from immigrants First Amendment rights they are entitled to and that are cherished by us all. It would, for example, permit the deportation of a legal permanent resident who innocently makes an online contribution to a tsunami relief fund that is a subsidiary of an organization in a Tamil Tiger-controlled region of Sri Lanka.

Additionally, the REAL ID Act would permit more secret hearings and trials and cut back judicial review of deportation orders: The Real ID Act would broadly expand the restrictions on judicial review imposed by laws enacted in 1996 that gave rise to in absentia deportation trials, closed-door secret-evidence deportation trials, and video-conference deportation trials where the judge is in one city and the alien in another.

Third, the REAL ID Act grants the Department of Homeland Security the ability to waive all federal, state and local law in order to expedite the building fences and other physical barriers at our borders. In addition to any of the carefully crafted environmental laws, DHS could also waive labor, safety, hiring, and discrimination laws.

Also, under the Real ID Act, private bounty hunters would be given access to confidential law enforcement files on noncitizens. It is already difficult to determine the status of an immigrant in the United States, with the myriad documents that can indicate lawful presence. It is even harder to determine whether a specific individual is in deportation proceedings, and to determine with certainty the identity of an individual suspected of being in the United States illegally. The Real ID Act would give broad powers to untrained and bounty-driven civilians to stalk and arrest immigrants, even when they meet the terms of their bonds, solely on the bounty hunter's opinion that they might flee.

The United States needs true immigration reform, not this sham of a "national security" bill. By attaching this bill to emergencing spending funds for troops in Iraq and for Tsunami Aid, a small segment of the GOP is trying to bully the rest of Congress into passing a measure that requires debate and editing. Suspending habeas corpus, encouraging bounty hunters and making our laws hostile to those seeking asylum is not even a close start to making our country safe from future terrorist attacks.

I'm talking about cell phones... According to this CBS News article, people are increasingly making fake phone calls on their cells. Why? For an excuse to being late to a meeting at work, to brag about some new job you got... you name it.

Seriously. These people should be ashamed.

Thomas Friedman says George H. W. Bush (41) should be the U.N. ambassador, instead of John Bolton...

Paul Rusesabagina, the hotel manager who saved over 1000 lives during the Rwanda genocide, as depicted in the movie Hotel Rwanda, spoke at Depauw University in Greencastle, IN last night. Numerous of my law classmates and I were in attendance.

Mr. Rusesabagina ran through the events to which he was a party during the Rwandan genocide and highlighted some differences between the real events and the movie's depiction. Overall, the two seemed remarkably similar.

His speech highlighted the course of genocide-- usually beginning with forced displacement from homes, compared the Rwandan genocide to what is happening today in the Sudan, highlighted weaknesses in the application of the Geneva Convention's call for nations to stop genocide in other nations, and advocated an approach by the West "similar to the approach in South Africa" including both pressure and diplomacy.

A handout authored by Rusesabagina and Don Cheadle, the actor that portrayed him in the movie, stated that by conservative estimates 200,000 people have died in Sudan, and called on us to prevent a Hotel Darfur.

Find out more by going to SafeDarfur.org

Ariana Huffington on the left... Maureen Dowd on the right...

It's everybody's favorite Indiana political topic: Daylight Savings Time (DST)!

Don't worry, I'm not going to drag forth the in's and out's of the DST debate again here on the blog, but I just had a couple thoughts.

On Wednesday the Indiana senate will engage in a close vote on whether or not to move the state to DST. If it makes it past the senate, the house is likely to pass it, and Governor Daniels has already promised to sign it.

But not so fast! Congress is getting in the action too. They are debating a bill to expand DST by 2 months-- would begin in the first week of March and end in the last week of November. That would leave only 3 months not on DST. Not your grandpa's "summer time" now is it?

You know, why not just move the whole year onto DST? With 9 months with additional sunlight in the evening, how happy are we to be plunged into darkness in the 3 winter months, when I might add, it's already darker? This trend highlights the overall ridiculousness of DST.

Yet, I still support Indiana's adoption of it. Go figure.

Chris at Musings of a Domer has a good round-up of some positive developments in Sudan.

Back in December, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told a group of marines that the companies making armor for the army's humvees were pumping it out as quickly as possible.

According to a GAO report released last week, this assertion was false. Both the assembly company and the armor production company could have ramped up production but did not do so because the army was pacing orders from them.

Either Rumsfeld knew the truth and lied, he was lied to by an inferior official, or he didn't know the truth and just made it up (most likely). It seems to me that the Defense Secretary should know the state of our army.

In a past post I said would delay my call for Rumsfeld to retire until I knew the full truth regarding the armor. That time is now.

And as the marines of company E can attest, the effects of armor shortage are all too real.

... is that the people polled have to know what they think, for the overall results to be meaningful. Quite often this is not the case.

Take, for instance, this WaPo-ABC poll of American Catholics. These findings seem incongruent:

- 80% believe the new Pope will chart a conservative theological course
- 73% said they are "enthusiastic" regarding Benedict
- 52% believe the Church is out of touch with American Catholics

Of course there is a way to explain the apparent discrepancy, but I'll leave that up to your imaginations.

[thanks to EmperorDan for the link]

Today is the Blue & Gold Game, Notre Dame's annual well-attended spring scrimmage. This will be the students, alumni, and other ND football fans first chance to see new recruits in action, the team veterans showing their improvements, as well as Charlie Weis's coaching.

Notre Dame will be better this year than either of the previous two years. Will we win the national championship? No. Will we make a BCS bowl? Maybe. Of course I cannot be sure of Weis' stuff, but his actions and words thus far give reason for confidence. With next year's recruiting class being predicted early-on as a top 10 class, the near future could bode even better.

And thus our opponents shall have their reckoning. Let each Fighting Irish victory serve as a painful reminder to them of how ignorant and wrong they were... I speak of newspaper columnists like Michael Wilbon of the Washington Post and Bob Kravitz of the Indianapolis Star. I speak of bloggers like Daniel P., ND administrators like Chandra Johnson and Monk Malloy, benedict arnolds like Aaron Taylor, everyone at ESPN, and I speak of the thousands of other people around the country who WANT to see Notre Dame fail. These people don't understand greatness. It confounds them, because it is so foreign to them. It scares them.

Well after ND gets through with them, their fear will be quite understandable.

This nation's real conservatives are beginning to make themselves heard. And they are poised to challenge evangelicals (the political affiliation, not the religious descriptor) for the heart of the Republican Party.

The difference is easily explained. Conservatives have a vision for government-- its structure, its distribution of power, and its role in people's lives. They also have a strong tie to tradition and traditional values. They realize that their vision of government is best prepared to protect those values.

Evangelicals, on the other hand, share many of their beliefs on traditional values, but they are willing to contort the government to achieve their goals. They don't understand things like fiscal discipline, states' rights, and certainly not the judiciary.

Charles Krauthammer, one of a certain DC guest blogger's favorite columnists, looks at the latest round of Republican poor attitude towards the judiciary.

The Senate judiciary committee voted along partisan lines yesterday to advance Bush's latest two conservative judicial nominees and the the Senate Dems have already vowed a filibuster. The board is set and next week the battle shall be afoot.

Disappointingly Senate majority leader Bill Frist has agreed to provide a minute videotaped speech for a televised event called "Justice Sunday" being held by several Christian Conservative groups in an effort to portray Democrats' filibustering of Bush's nominees as discriminating against Christianity.

I firmly oppose any rhetoric or actions on either side of the aisle that seek to politically polarize this nation along religious lines. And I'm not the only one.

Senator Pryor's thoughts echo my own. As quoted by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette:

Their tactics threaten "to make the followers of Jesus Christ just another special-interest group," Pryor said in a conference call with Arkansas reporters. "It is presumptuous of them to think that they represent all Christians in America, even to say they represent all evangelical Christians," added Pryor, 42, a first-term Democrat who has considered himself an evangelical Christian for 25 years.

Evangelical no longer describes a religious attitude. Now it describes a political affiliation.

Sony, the proponent of the Blu-ray spec, and Toshiba the propent behind the HD-DVD spec, are in negotiations to create a unified next generation DVD standard. Let's hope they succeed. If they don't, it will mean higher prices of the media and the media players in the next few years.

"The unexamined life isn't worth living."

- Aristotle

I went to the Cake concert in Champaign, IL Wednesday night. It was terrific, as expected. Here's a good example of Cake lyrics:


We know of an ancient radiation
That haunts dismembered constellations,
A faintly glimmering radio station.
While frank sinatra sings stormy weather,
The flies and spiders get along together,
Cobwebs fall on an old skipping record.

Beyond the suns that guard this roof,
Beyond your flowers of flaming truths,
Beyond your latest ad campaigns,
An old man sits collecting stamps
In a room all filled with chinese lamps.
He saves what others throw away.
He says that he’ll be rich some day.

We know of an ancient radiation
That haunts dismembered constellations,
A faintly glimmering radio station.

We know of an ancient radiation
That haunts dismembered constellations,
A faintly glimmering radio station.
While frank sinatra sings stormy weather,
The flies and spiders get along together,
Cobwebs fall on an old skipping record

- Cake, "Frank Sinatra"

I find myself to be very fortunate to be reading C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity at the same time as the election of Benedict XVI. Although not Catholic, C.S. Lewis helped me to understand the core of Catholicism, faith and prayer. That is why every time I read a column or editorial or story expressing disappointment in the election of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to be Pope, I want to scream. There have been several columns and op-eds this week saying that the Catholic Church needs to be more liberal and open to change, especially regarding birth control, abortion, stem cell research and other important issue. These same pieces say that the Church is out of touch with today's society and that is why Church attendance is declining. In today's Washington Post, Richard Cohen, urges Catholic dissidents to be forceful in their opposition to Church authority. In response to all of this, I challenge those who want to "liberalize" the Church to understand Catholicism as not just a religion but also as a faith.

Several people, Catholics and non-Catholics, feel that the Catholic Church is unrealistic in its ban on contraceptives, abortion, stem cell research and euthanasia, to name a few. I join Pope Benedict XVI in his fight against moral relativism. I believe that when people say they are a Catholic, they should act like Catholics. To quote Michael Novak from Lucas' post yesterday, "When all opinions are considered subjective, no moral ground remains for protesting against lies and injustices." Those who call for the Church to be realistic need to realize that faith itself is not realistic. It is not realistic for the son of God to allow himself to be crucified for the sins of humanity, but that is what the Catholic faith teaches and that is what I, as a person of faith believe. It is not realistic for a person to rise from the dead three days after being buried, but that is the foundation of the Christian faith.

Today's society understands little regarding the purpose or meaning of faith. We are so caught up on being happy now and finding happiness that will last forever on earth. We have become selfish, calling the Church's teachings unrealistic. It is not unrealistic, it is called sacrifice. When push comes to shove, many times we don't want to sacrifice what we want now for what God wants. We expect to "get something" by going to Church. But that is not what the Catholic faith teaches.

I can only speak for myself, but I believe in my faith not to find happiness on earth, but for a chance of happiness after this life on earth. I believe that Church is about bringing the grace that God has granted us throughout the week and sharing it with others, and if I get something out of attending Mass, then that is a bonus. Jesus never said that his path was easy or realistic, he said it would be hard, that we may be laughed, that people might turn against us, but he encouraged us to stay strong. Those who want the Church to loosen its teachings, those who don't want to sacrifice need to look deep in their souls and ask themselves what God calls them to sacrifice each day. The answer is not much.

With complaints regarding Pope Benedict XVI's conservatism and orthodoxy surrounding us, we Catholics need to be reminded of our faith, of our call to sacrifice. Finally, we must remember Jesus' words in the Garden of Gethsemane, "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."

I wrote this post before Kristine's, but Blogger was being lazy and decided not to work. I like to add this to k-lam's well-said thoughts.

A liberal pope is a bad idea.

It's nothing against liberalism, folks. It's just the nature of liberalism.

The whole point of the philosophy of liberals, as this conservative understands it, is that the laws, policies, and beliefs of the past should never be set in stone. That is, what worked in the past may not be applicable in the future.

This is all well and good, if what you're trying to organize and administer is a government, a university, or even a society. But when we're dealing with the papacy, we're talking about the administration of the Catholic Church.

How is it any different? Because the Church's mission, above all else, is to find and live the Truth of Christ. The search for Truth should not be "liberal", and for that matter, it should not be "conservative" either. It should be honest and faithful.

The Church can, however, be "conservative" in the sense that Truth does not change over time. Christ's teachings will never become obsolete or unworkable, and that is the whole point of a religion that promises "eternal" life. In this way, we should always conserve that which is good and righteous, not doubt it when society begins to question its usefulness.

Many in the MSM are openly weeping or have resorted to hysterics (cough, Andrew Sullivan, cough) over the election of Benedict XVI. No article can go two sentences without using the terms "arch-conservative", "right-wing hardliner", "reactionary", or over even "neocon" to descrive the former Cardinal Ratzinger. But this zeal to attach political labels to what is most definitely not a political post does great harm to the papacy, and also to reasoned debate.

The rhetoric of liberals is extremely unhelpful in this respect. It should come as no surprise to anyone that the leader of the Catholic Church is faithful to Catholic doctrine. Demanding that the Church "modernize", "accomodate", or "become more relevant" is the wrong way to think and talk about a new pope. If they would only couch their words in terms of searching for Truth insteading of liberalizing the church, they might find people more responsive.

Today, space.com reported that the White House wants to decrease NASA's aeronautics spending over the next few years, despite urgings from the chairman of the House Appropriations science, state, justices and commerce subcommittee that funds be increased. Nevermind that the White House is demanding that NASA figure out a way to not only get back to the moon, but Mars as well. Nevermind that NASA has an integrated partnership with the FAA, constantly doing research and simulations in order to make not only astronauts, but also commercial pilots, as safe as can be. Nevermind that NASA owns some of the most sophisticated, near-landmarked, aeronautics facilities available. Let's cut spending.

But he does have a point that NASA needs to refocus its goals and objectives if it wants to be taken seriously and respected, both in the scientific and political communities.

In an interesting coincidence, this news arrives on the heels of SpaceShipOne inventor Burt Rutan's forecast that commercial spaceflight is not only a possibility in our future, but well within reach before this decade is out. It looks like spaceflight might very well follow in the footsteps of aviation. Last century, it was the adventurous who make flight possible, but the businessmen who made it a market. I believe commercial spaceflight will take a similar path, and just like the presence of the commercial market allowed the government to determine it’s niche in aviation development and regulation, so too may commercial spaceflight allow – or force – NASA to take a step back to determine what its own role will be in the pursuit of science.

A NYT reporter is speculating that defense lawyers may try to get 20th 9/11 hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui off his death sentence, after the terrorist asked the judge that he be excuted.

The judge ruled that Moussaoui was competent to plead guilty, but perhaps his lawyers should now claim that the very fact that he is asking for death is evidence that he is not mentally capable.

Silly reporter! We already decided that the right to die is a good thing, earlier this month. Money quote from Andy McCarthy over on the Corner, on the NYT's theory of choice:

"So, follow the logic: Expression of the supposed choice to die, if purportedly made by an innocent but inconvenient person, based on “proof” of the most suspect nature, must at all costs be deferred to on the theory that it is a personal and thoughtful decision. To the contrary, expression of the choice to die by a guilty terrorist, proved indisputably in an unambiguous written assertion by the person himself, is actually evidence that the person is “mentally unfit” on the theory that, well, who in his right mind would make such a personal choice to die? "

Apparently Sen. Pat Leahy only opposes the abolition of the filibuster when it helps his party.

At least Sen. Robert Byrd is being consistent. He supported the filibuster when he used it to stall civil rights legislation, and he supports it still. Good job, Bob!

DATELINE: NICEA, 325 A.D.
News Analysis

Claudius Heresy

The Catholic Church today has struck a bold new path at the Council of Nicea, one that Pope Sylverser said would enable Christians to better understand and worship the Lord. However, some moderate theologians are concerned that the hard-line, ultra-conservative approach of Sylvester and some other bishops will alienate the laity.

"I'm concerned," said Fr. Richard McBrien, an esteemed theology professor at Gaul University.

"I really thought we should reach out more, you know? Try to understand the Arians and not make them feel unwelcome."

One of the controversies concerned the two natures of Jesus Christ: human and divine. Official church teaching is that this dual nature is dogma, but other Catholics and their opinions have seemingly now been left out in the cold.

"I'm so disappointed. I just don't understand why we have to write this in stone," lamented Ivana Pagan, 20, a sophomore peace studies major from Tarsus College. Ms. Pagan expressed her discomfort for the decisions made at the council. "I came here to debate, not to be scoled for believing that Simon, Martha, John, and Pontius Pilate were also divine. Who are they to tell me I'm wrong?"

Father McBrien thinks that Ivana's heartbreak is emblematic of the frustration many Catholics feel at the Church's refusal to modernize its belief system.

"Look, why is the Church trying to fight Roman culture? What is so wrong with sacrifices to Neptune? Christ didn't come to Earth to condemn us; he came to liberate! And what's more liberating than the feast of Dionysus?"

A recently conducted focus group, with samples from Syracuse, Alexandria, and Corinth may confirm these fears. In the study, 65% percent of Christians found the concept of one god "too restrictive" or "moderately restrictive". 73% of those surveyed declared the concept of the Holy Spirit "probably false", while only 19% agreed that it was "true" or "probably true".

The poll has a margin of error of +/- 40%

Andreus Sullivanus, a Celtic commentator, agrees with the findings of the poll.
Between sobs, Andreus accused the pope of being a Nazi. (No one in Rome is quite sure what that is exactly. The word may be Sumerian in origin). "The Catholic Church of today is now indistinguishable from that of the former Nero regime," Sullivanus complained. "Heed the warning: free thinkers are to be trampled underfoot, dissenters are to be crucified."

When asked if he felt he might just be over-reacting, Andreus denounced that possiblity as "Wha! WHA!!!"

Most pundits agree that the Council's decisions will have a detrimental effect.
"People should be comfortable coming to Church, be they Gnostics, Arians, Huns, or Bacchanalians," McBrien added, shaking his head. "Drawing lines in the sand like this only drives people away!"

Without making itself more relevant, it seems Catholicism may end up in the ash heap of history, joining its parent religion, Judaism. However, as the number of people calling themselves practicing Catholics steadily dwindles, those who remain keep the faith, so to speak, that eventually the Church will modernize.

Pagan opined, "One day, I'll be able to walk into Church, with my husband and his 4 other wives, and not feel all the congregation staring me down. Once we get a newer, more moderate pope who isn't so reactionary, I'll finally be able to say 'I'm going to my orgy now' and know that my Church accepts me for who I am."

After several days on the blog, I feel I have sufficient data and have thus pulled the poll from the main page. Here are the results:

8% strongly liberal
22% moderately liberal
47% moderately conservative
22% strongly liberal

I will note the following... For the first few days the liberal/conservative ratio remained balanced, but then the conservatives seemed to gain consistently. I suspect voting fraud (a person or two voting multiple times by changing IPs), but I cannot be sure.

I'll have additional polls in the future, as this was kindof fun.

Open blogging time...

This op-ed in the NYTimes, with the sarcastic title Rome's Radical Conservative, says that Benedict XVI does not fit very well the stereotypes ("Panzer Catholic," "God's rotweiler," etc.) that his opponents craft for him. It's a well-informed read.

Further, Pope Benedict XVI, in his first homily as pope, laid out his first openly stated goal: bridge the divide within Christianity. I, for one, would greatly welcome a renewed ecumenicism. Of course, it takes two to tango.

I've added a new blog to the sidebar: Expresso by the Indianapolis Star editorial board. It shows promise, though at this point it lacks the attitude and personality which are essential to a blog's success. I think it may also lack focus, but that will take time to see.

The press in China may not be free, but when Daily Contentions picks up shop and makes the long hop across the Pacific, there will be at least one independent news source in that nation... And it will have photos, I hope.

'New pontiff loyal to Church theology' [WashTimes]

The article itself isn't bad, but the headline is a no-brainer.

As this nice MSNBC article points out, Einstein's discoveries impact our daily lives in many ways we fail to realize. From toothpaste to nuclear energy, he's had his hands on everything. Read the article, I'm serious :-)

We have a new Pope, and it is Joseph Ratzinger of Germany, now Pope Benedict XVI.

This happened only a handful of minutes after I finished the post immediately below. I'll have useful links and thoughts as I have time to post them...

Wikipedia has good info on Ratzinger... (thanks to Daniel)

EWTN has a great page with historical information on the popes... (thanks to Ornelas)

NRO has some great Ratinger quotes... (thanks again to Ornelas)

The text of Pope Benedict XVI's speech:

"Dear brothers and sisters, after the great Pope John Paul II, the cardinals have elected me - a simple, humble worker in the vineyard of the Lord.

"The fact that the Lord can work and act even with insufficient means consoles me, and above all I entrust myself to your prayers.

"In the joy of the risen Lord, trusting in his permanent help, we go forward. The Lord will help us and Mary his very holy mother stands by us."

I will maintain my pledge to not lower DC into the depths of papal speculation. The New York Times, et al., have already gone there to their detriment.

Rather I point to this E.J. Dionne column about Cardinal Ratzinger, not to speculate on his chances of being chosen pope, but to introduce a discussion on the future direction of the Catholic Church. This discussion will only intensify once the new pope has actually been chosen.

Dionne's lede is bold:

ROME -- The words broke like a thunderclap inside St. Peter's Basilica. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, addressing the world's cardinals just hours before they sequestered themselves Monday to choose the next leader of the world's 1 billion Catholics, decided to define this conclave.

"We are moving," he declared, toward "a dictatorship of relativism . . . that recognizes nothing definite and leaves only one's own ego and one's own desires as the final measure."

Cardinal Ratzinger has put the target squarely on secular humanist individualism. The challenge facing the Church and the next pope will be to balance maintaining absolute moral constructs while at the same time being flexible on the structure and means by which the Church conveys its message to the world.

Cell phone companies are positioning themselves to compete with Apple's digital music dominance. The plan is to replace Apple's scheme of downloading songs using the internet to one's computer and then transferring them to your iPod, with a distribution system that downloads songs using the wireless cellular networks to a new class of cell phones.

The advantages of such a scheme would be the flexibility and spontaneity that wireless downloading of songs would allow. The disadvantages would be slower speed, less capacity players, less user-friendly players, and higher price (songs sold this way are expected to be sold between $2-$3).

My prediction: the cell companies' model won't go beyond a niche market at first, but in a few years, expect a multiplicity of wireless devices, including iPods, that take advantage of the emerging everywhere broadband internet that the cellular companies are creating. Also expect some governmental regulation to open up the cellular networks which will be worth boatloads of cash by this time.

I'll preface this post with two points. First, I realize that the chances of there being an American pope are slim to none. Second, I am not familiar enough with any of the American cardinals to make a reasoned argument for any of them personally. Rather, I focus here on the global theological and political concerns of the day.

1. The next pope should be from a nation where Catholicism is stagnating... Africa and South America have booming numbers of Catholics and new priests, and thus they don't need the local ministry of a new pope. JP2 was from Poland and look at the effects he had there. Europe does not have a booming Catholic population and neither does America, as long as you don't count the influx of Catholics from across our southern border.

2. A dangerous spiritual dichotomy is developing in the world: fundamentalism (I don't actually like that term, but nothing else works right now) versus secularism. In Europe this battle takes the form of lapsed Christians versus Muslims, in a fight for the hearts and spirits of the populace.

In America, where mainline protestant denominations are losing numbers, it takes the form of evangelicals versus secular political groups. The Catholic Church represents a third option. Europe could be a lost cause, temporarily, in terms of re-energizing the Catholic masses, but America, I feel, is ripe for it. It could be the exemplar for a renewed Catholic vigor in the developed world.

3. An American pope could also help bridge the America versus the world divide which is present in too many people's hearts, both here and in "the rest" of the world. It's time for America to be a leaders amongst the world's nations, not apart from them.

Update: Read about how Hispanic immigrants are keeping certain parishes afloat in Indianapolis... Also read this excellent George Will column about Europe's lapsed Christian faith...

I'd be interested to see the general composition of DC's readership. So in an effort to gather some stats, here is the first readership poll:

[poll has been moved to the right sidebar...]

Today is everyone's favorite day of the year... that's right, it's the day the government wants you turn in your income tax forms. In fact, Americans have spent about 6.6 billion hours filling out those forms. So to all of us taxpayers, I give you these lyrics:

Let me tell you how it will be,
There’s one for you, nineteen for me,
‘Cos I’m the Taxman,
Yeah, I’m the Taxman.
Should five per cent appear too small,
Be thankful I don’t take it all,
‘Cos I’m the Taxman,
Yeah, I’m the Taxman.
If you drive a car, I’ll tax the street,
If you try to sit, I’ll tax your seat,
If you get too cold, I’ll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I’ll tax your feet.
Taxman.
‘Cos I’m the Taxman,
Yeah, I’m the Taxman.
Don’t ask me what I want it for
(Taxman Mister Wilson)
If you don’t want to pay some more
(Taxman Mister Heath),
‘Cos I’m the Taxman,
Yeah, I’m the Taxman.
Now my advice for those who die,
Declare the pennies on your eyes,
‘Cos I’m the Taxman,
Yeah, I’m the Taxman.
And you’re working for no-one but me,
Taxman.

- The Beatles, "Taxman" (off the first album I ever owned of theirs... "Revolver")

According to this WaPo article, Sen. Frist "all but certain" to use the nuclear option (a procedural maneuver to declare filibusters of nominees unconstitutional) sometime in the next few weeks, as judicial nominations pop up again in the Senate.

Republicans have been doing a lot of lip service to this option in the last few days-- so much so, in fact, that I suspect it could be a bluff to scare the Democrats into conceding or compromising where they wouldn't earlier.

Or maybe they're not bluffing. This is a fierce game of political chicken.

BEIJING/TOKYO (Reuters) - The United States warned its citizens in China Friday of possible new anti-Japan demonstrations, saying they could turn against foreigners in general, as Beijing stressed that illegal protests would be punished.