Maybe

Maybe God feels the same way, more or less, about the person with the cheesey Christian bumper sticker; the person who has a 30 minute "quiet time" every day at 4:30 on the dot; the person who raises their hands and wears a goofy smile while singing in church; the person who refuses to listen to Radiohead and Death Cab For Cutie because they aren't Christian bands; the person who pretends to speak in tongues because they don't understand why they can't but they want to fit in; the person who always ties everything back to "God is in control"; the person who spews Evangelical sound bites but can't quote scripture; the person who believes that the US is the "new Israel"; the person who reads the King James version of the Bible; the person who believes that there are literal treasures and streets of gold in heaven; the person who believes that their dead relatives are in heaven with God and can hear their prayers; the person who uses church as a way to increase their social standing; as he does about me with my bitterness, high-minded theological ideas often based more on what makes sense to me than scripture or meditation, and my self-righteous emergent theology. And maybe that's what this is really all about.

Argentina to China

Standing out in the hall (not the cold) before class today one of my friends brought up the subject of drilling straight through the center of the Earth and coming out in China. Specifically, he was wondering where you would have to start to end up in China. Being the brilliant, almost-Masters-of-Science Computer scientists that we are, we realized that anywhere in the northern hemisphere would place you in the southern hemisphere on the other side, thus missing China. This did not stop us, being the brilliant almost-blah-blah-blah that we are, from theorizing that perhaps you could tunnel from Cuba and that there is a "Communist connection" between China and Cuba through the middle of the Earth through which citizens of these countries can travel. Not long after this thought, one of the Chinese students came by. We asked him where we would have to start drilling from to end up in China and, without even pausing to think, he replied "Oh, Argentina." We were a little perturbed by how fast he answered, so our interest was piqued. And look what we found. All this time, it was just sitting right below our noses. I figure the travel time is so fast because on the way to the center of the earth you are basically free falling, so you'll go at least terminal velocity, if you're unchecked.

Value Size

I've noticed that here in Waco "Value Size" has a different meaning than I'm used to. At the local grocery chain, HEB (local to Texas), I've consistently found that the "Value Size" packages are more expensive than buying the same or more of the same product in its regular sized variety. I, and it seems logical, always assumed that the "Value" in "Value Size" implied that there was some monetary benefit to buying things in larger quantities. Based on the fact that these items still exist, I can only conclude that most people do not compare prices when they buy such things and they assume that the addition of "Value" to the description of the item implies some savings to them, never considering that the added value might actually be flowing in the opposite direction on the free market food chain.

Monday Morning

Michael Yon has a great piece about militant Islam up that I highly recommend. He covers the scope and causes of this scourge and highlights its far-reaching effects around the world.

On a completely separate note, I wish there was an episode of Batman where something about the apocalypse is the theme and Robin, at some point, exclaims: "Holy eschaton, Batman!"

The Israel Situation: My Opinion

I am not opposed to Israel taking military action in response to attacks against it. Furthermore, it doesn't seem to me that they are using "disproportionate" force. It seems to me that they are responding to an act of aggression just like anyone else would. However, I have reservations about the approach Israel has taken in their response. Everyone who would know seems to say that the roots of these attacks are Syria and Iran, not Lebanon. And while the Lebanese government may not be doing enough to prevent action against Israel, it may not really be causing it. So, if I were Israel I would be clear that the war is not against Lebanon, but against the people wanting to harm Israel that may be in Lebanon. Instead Israel is saying the opposite. And I think that is why the Hezbollah aggressors can say, "'Let the Israelis do whatever they want - no military operation will result in the return of the soldiers.'" It is not their country being attacked by Israel. Theirs are not the homes being destroyed. It would be as if Argentinean terrorists attacked the US through Mexico and in response we bomb Mexico City. It may send the message "you need to keep terrorist out of your country or we consider you to be helping them." Which may be a useful and necessary message. But it is not directly striking at the terrorists because they don't care what happens to Mexico. There may be reasons for Israel to hit Lebanon the way it has. For example, they have bombed the airport and major road ways to prevent the Hezbollah militants from moving the kidnapped Israeli soldiers out of the country. This seems like a good strategy with, hopefully, direct results. However, saying that they are going to "set Lebanon back 20 years" may not be the best strategy. My opinion is that if Israel is intent on stopping the attacks they need to go to the root of the cause and attack Syria, which ultimately will lead to a confrontation with Iran. And a lot of considerations need to be made before doing so, considerations that I do not know enough about to comment on. Like the possibility of Iran and Syria having WMDs. Like Iran's true military strength. Like how real the possibility is that China and Russia might back Iran if they go to war with Israel. I hope that leaders in Israel are thinking about these things and making strategies with the US military and other allies to assure that the situation does not get out of hand. What I worry about is Israel deciding to "set Lebanon back 20 years" because it cannot afford to confront Syria and Iran directly and having Lebanon be the only casualty with the terrorist base remaining largely untouched.

For some other interesting opinions check out Hugh Hewitt's page. He has his opinion as well as links to several others. One particularly interesting (although not eloquent) read is Yoni's blog. Yoni is a veteran of the IDF who is now living in the US. I've heard him on Hugh's radio show several times and he offers an interesting insider view on all things Israeli.

***UPDATE***
This report records Israeli officials speaking in a way that seems much more reasonable to me. Rather than approaching the situation as if they are at war with the nation/government of Lebanon, they now say that they "'want to force the government of Lebanon to take responsibility and that means that they put someone instead of Hezbollah along the border, someone that represents the sovereign state.'"

Cracks Like Spider Webs

Israel claims that it has concrete evidence that the Lebanese militants that kidnapped two Israeli soldiers have plans to transport them to Iran. The US, according to this report, says that it holds Syria and Iran responsible for the kidnapping since they are the main supporters of Hezbollah. The Iranian government warned that if Israel attacked Syria it would be considered an attack on the "entire Islamic world." Meanwhile, the Lebanese government -- the newest democracy in the Middle East -- claims it had no knowledge that the attacks were going to occur, but Israel is holding them responsible anyway and taking out their valuable and necessary infrastructure. Supposedly Bush is promising the Lebanese government that he will press Israel to show restraint. However, the same headline has been running for a few days, and Israel doesn't seem to be showing much restraint. Here is my synopsis of the situation as seen through the media: some Hezbollah militants that are probably part of Syrian forces that were supposed to have left Lebanon years ago and are supported by Syria and Iran attacked Israel and kidnapped two soldiers. Israel responded with overwhelming force and claims they are going to "send Lebanon back 20 years." However, the "fragile" democratic government in Lebanon did not sanction or know about the attacks before hand. So, Israel is responding with harsh force in a way that will probably topple the government of its only neighboring democracy because some people supported by Iran and Syria attacked from that country. And if Israel actually attacks the nations behind the whole thing it will start a huge war that may spark larger conflicts around the globe.

That may not all be true, but that seems to be the picture that is painted by the news reports. I don't know enough about everything going on to speculate on how accurate those reports are. However, no matter how you look at it, the current situation is leaning towards further escalation, not towards a quick resolution. The short term impact here: higher gas prices. The long term impact: it depends on how far this "war" (as Israel believes it to be) reaches and how long it goes on.

Meanwhile, the world seems to have forgotten that Israel still has troops deployed in Palestine (at least they did last time any one reported on it). Maybe that is Israel's strategy -- to engage in a potentially much more harmful conflict, in international terms, so that the world stops watching what it is doing in Palestine. Israel was receiving a lot of flak internationally about its recent activity there, and now that pressure is gone. So now they are free to accomplish whatever their real goals in Palestine are without having to hear protests from the world every time they kill a civilian. I'm a typical center-right American in a lot of ways, so usually I support Israel in the Israel-Palestine conflict. However, I am also a Christian and a decent human being, so I wholeheartedly oppose the indiscriminate killing of civilians. Israel has not shown restraint towards Palestinian civilians at certain times in the past. They seemed to be this time, but maybe that was because of international pressure. Its possible that they are using the Lebanese conflict as a smoke screen to allow them to move decisively and destructively against the Palestinian population in general, and by the time we hear about it, it will be too late to try to stop it. I hope that is not the case, but it is another fear in the current situation.

***Update***
Under the pretense of Israel's sovereignty, the White House says that Bush will ask Israel to minimize "collateral damage" but he "is not going to make military decisions for Israel." This seems like a lame excuse because Bush has not seemed to have a problem trying to make military decisions for nations we oppose. I think that the truth is that Bush will not ask Israel to stop because he doesn't think they should, for whatever reason. Maybe they are good reasons, maybe not. I don't know enough about the situation to say either way. I guess this sounds better diplomatically -- if anyone believes it.

The Ice is Getting Thinner

Anyone who pays attention to the news already knows that Lebanon based Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers, Israel called it an "act of war," and Israel is currently invading Lebanon, ostensibly to get its soldiers back. This, in my mind, is horrible news. Unless Israel leaves quickly, which they claim they won't, I cannot imagine that Syria will not get involved. On one hand this is not a huge added threat to Israel because the Syrian military is not much better than the Lebanese or Palestinian (meaning Israel's army will have no problem defeating them in any open confrontations). However, it means that more and more of the region is getting involved. In the short run it may actually help the war in Iraq because many radical terrorist types will probably go to fight Israel instead of fighting in Iraq. However, if Iraqis perceive the situation to be the US helping Israel fight other Arab and Muslim countries it could cause greater unrest among the groups in Iraq that are already resistant to the new government there. Furthermore, there is the small (I hope) possibility that Saddam really did give Syria most of his WMD's before the invasion, and they might use those against Israel. No matter how weak their military, that remains a very serious threat and an even greater catalyst for escalation.

I really hope that no matter what happens that Jordan doesn't get involved because in the past several years they have increased their ties with the West and the US in particular, and it would be a shame for all that progress to disappear. Also, it would further turn the conflict into an "all the Arab countries against Israel" type of conflict. And this may lead to what should be our worst fears.

And those fears, of course, are that Iran would get involved. If Iran gets involved the situation may turn into an all out war in the region. This would cause most of the rest of the world to get involved in some way. If things follow the pattern they have in recent years, China and Russia would support Iran while the US, UK, Poland, Canada and Australia support Israel and the rest of Europe talks a lot about the war but doesn't do much. This, hopefully, is an unlikely scenario.

So, by quickly reacting to the instigation of Hezbollah militants with an invasion, Israel has, over night, significantly thinned the ice on which the world is walking in the Middle East. The worst case would involve a significant conflict and change in world politics. The best case... I'm not sure what the best case is. I guess the best case would be Israel getting their soldiers back and leaving Lebanon quickly. No matter what happens, the current escalation is certainly a very bad thing with the possibility of far reaching and long lasting effects.

Plugging the Firefox Leak

You may have noticed that Firefox takes up a lot of RAM. On my laptop, it takes at least 50MB to have even one tab open, and it seems to grow up to 150-190MB when I start opening other tabs. Searching on the web I found this fix that seems to work. I allowed Firefox to have 32MB of memory and it doesn't seem to be exceeding that even when I have several tabs open. And so far it doesn't seem to have slowed down much if at all. If you've been experiencing poor system performance due to Firefox's greediness, try this. Just don't read the comment conversation at the bottom of the linked post -- its pretty painful.

****UPDATE****
Well, Firefox is taking up more than the allotted 32MB now, but its less than before (~60MB) and I do have 4 tabs open. So maybe that 32MB allottment is per tab or something. It makes sense that it grows as you add tabs because it has to hold almost as much information per tab as it would if you opened a new instance of the browser for each. So, I don't know exactly how it works but this fix still seems to be saving me some memory.

Hubcap Gang

There is a nefarious group afoot in Waco, Texas. At first I thought it was an innocent mistake when I noticed that my front passenger-side hubcap was missing. I thought that maybe the shop had some reason to have it off while replacing my timing belt and changing my oil, but it was the holiday weekend so I had to wait until Wednesday to ask them. But then I started to notice it. Car after car missing only one hubcap. All around Waco I've noticed them. All different makes and models, although it seemed more prevalent on the modest price range sedans, like mine. Suspicion grew and theories ran rampant, but there was still lingering doubt. When I got the call back from the shop, my worst fears were confirmed. The shop knew nothing of a missing hubcap -- I had lost it some time after they were done with my car. And there were all those other missing-one-hubcap cars around. There could be no denying it now, Waco is facing a serious crisis. Apparently some deranged group or individual finds pleasure in collecting single hubcaps from local cars. And I have fallen victim. And I can't help but wonder, when that group or person looks at my hubcap, do they remember me? Do they remember the intimate details of my car? Or am I just another chalk mark on the board, another successful conquest? I suppose these, like many other questions, will never be answered. But I can still hope that somewhere out there someone is loving my hubcap as much as I did, and that one day, in this life or the next, we will meet again.

A Few Quick Questions

Why doesn't Palestine seem to be afraid of Israel at all? Is it the same reason that North Korea doesn't seem to be afraid of the US at all (or the UN or Japan, etc)? Does it matter that the CIA closed its unit dedicated to searching for Bin Laden? Was it doing any good, or just wasting money? Do we still care much about catching him (relatively speaking)? Can Iran keep stalling forever while continuing with its nuclear program unchecked? Is anyone surprised that the Mexican presidential vote is probably going to a recount? Does any one really care about Lil' Kim getting out of jail? Did anyone really believe the stereotype that fat people are all 'jolly'? And what's with politicians always waving their hands in the air?

One Legged Birds Eat Dead Bugs

I've had two fairly bizarre experiences over the last few days that had nothing to do with me other than the fact that I observed them.

The first begins with miscommunication. My wife needs a job, so we are applying everywhere we can think of. I have a friend who is a manager at the local Barnes and Noble, so I asked him at church on Sunday if he might be able to help us out. He told me we should come by when he was working the next day between 7am and 3pm. I have a class at 9:40am, so in the interest of getting to class on time and looking eager, we decided to go around 7 (my wife can't drive a standard, so she can't drive my car -- yet). Luckily I set the alarm wrong and we didn't get up until after 7, because my friend forgot to mention that, even though he starts work at 7, the store doesn't open until 9. So we got there around 8:30 and waited. While we were waiting I saw a bird swoop down and peck some kind of a beetle. After it had mortally wounded the bug (legs flew off) it grabbed it in its beak and hopped away. While it was hopping I noticed it appeared to be only on one leg, and I wondered if a one-legged dance was some strange victory dance for this species. Then it turned so its back was to me and I realized that it was hopping on one leg because it, in fact, only had one leg. Or rather it had only one foot and a stump leg that ended around the knee. I saw a one-legged bird eating a beetle. That was weird.

The other incident happened while I was walking to work yesterday. As I passed the business school two 30 or 40 something year old men came out and walked right in front of me. The part of their conversation I overheard went something like this:
Man 1: ...and cut the martyr complex right out.
Man 2: Speaking of church problems, did you hear about the PC USA...
Man 1: oh, did they have their convention already?
Man 2: I think that its just about to start, they're getting ready for it. Anyway, I heard that they started, not mandating, but accepting alternative descriptions of the trinity...
Man 1: < groans >
Man 2: the Parent, the Child, and...
Man 1: oh no
Man 2: yeah! And the Womb!
Man 1: What?
Man 2: Yeah, the Womb for the Holy Ghost!
Man 1: < shakes head as they walk away >

I was waiting for Redhurt's Jesus to come talk to them, but he never showed up (before I walked away from them, anyway). Besides the bizarreness of calling the Holy Spirit the Womb, that exchange was really funny to me because they were so... annoyed and condescending about the whole thing. But given the recentness of Redhurt's post I felt like it was rather ironic.

John Kerry: Still in Denial

John Kerry proposed a plan to pull US troops out of Iraq. The Senate overwhelmingly rejected his plan -- 86-13. Kerry called it a "dramatic step forward." Now, either he sees his defeat as a step in the right direction, or he has reached a very low point. When getting 13 out of 100 votes is a dramatic step its time to rethink your game plan. That's not even half of the democrats in the Senate. What I see here is Kerry trying not to look like a complete loser after being so completely defeated and, as usual, failing. Perhaps he was also referencing a plan put forth by Senator Levin which was defeated only 60-39. I guess going from 13 to 39 is a pretty dramatic step, but its still not even everyone in his own party. In reference to these two votes, ostensibly, Ted Kennedy said "'Democrats have sent a clear message.'" The only clear message I see here is that the Democrats are in big trouble and unless their leadership comes up with something new they can expect to continue in that trouble for another election cycle.

Zarqawi Killed

I don't know why this isn't bigger in the news, but apparently a US airstrike killed Abu Musa'ab al-Zarqawi earlier this week. Here are some links:
link 1
link 2
This is huge news. Zarqawi was probably second only to Bin-Laden on the US most wanted terrorists list. He was in charge of al Qaida in Iraq and hopefully his death will mean a quicker victory against that group. There are probably only a dozen or so people in the world whose death would have the potential to change events so greatly as Zarqawi's.

Honeymoon

I'm on my honeymoon right now, so I probably won't be posting anything real for another week or two.

A Member, Not a Ruler

A UN panel on torture called for the US to close its Guantanamo Bay detention center and should reform its interrogation process, among other things. I don't know that I totally agree with their conclusion. I think that they are right about many points. For example, I think that it is immoral for the US to "outsource" torture to countries where it is legal. I also think that some interrogation methods we have used, such as sexual humiliation or threatening death, are gray-area at best. I don't know that I would go as far as saying that GITMO should be closed altogether, though. Admittedly I don't have the same information as this panel, and they may be justified in their prescription. However, despite what I or any other Americans think, I believe that the US must take action to comply with the recommendations of this panel. If this panel has made mistakes or overstepped its bounds then the US needs to get the UN to admit such and formally absolve us from the corresponding charge. I think that I share a general disdain for the UN with many Americans. It is an organization rife with corruption and so bogged down by bureaucracy and politics that it rarely accomplishes anything of value. However, we can do nothing to improve the effectiveness and authority of the UN if we do not respect what it says. Furthermore, if we expect other countries (like Iraq under Saddam) to comply with UN directives and respect the body's authority to place requirements and restrictions on any country then we must similarly comply with and respect the UN. The US is clearly a very powerful force militarily, politically, socially, and economically worldwide. As such we have a responsibility, I feel, to use that power to lead other countries to a better future. We should take a leadership role here showing that all countries ought to respect the UN. If the US is willing to comply with the UN it will provide a large impetus for other countries to do the same. Furthermore, it will make us justified in moving against other countries that don't. We cannot use non-compliance with the UN as justification for aggression or political pressure if we don't comply with the UN ourselves. Finally, we ought to do what we can not to stand alone against the world but rather work towards unity and harmony. That is the goal of the UN. If it is broken we should take a leadership role in fixing it. But we need to work from within the system, not as though we are above it. If we comply with this panel it will show the world that the US recognizes the authority of the UN and we are committed to working with other nations to establish lasting peace. If we do not it will show the word that the UN is powerless and that we, the US, believe that we are above its authority and will stand alone unless the other nations of the world agree to do everything on our terms. I think the latter would be a huge mistake.

Better, Stronger, Faster

I live in Waco. Waco has more churches per capita than anywhere else in the world, so I see a lot of different churches, and many of these churches have signs out front proclaiming all kinds of trite catchphrases. Right now one of them says, "We don't change the message, the message changes you" Now, its a subtle thing, I know. But I think that there is value in examining it. Shouldn't it say, "We don't change the message, the message changes us"? Whether that is what they meant or not, I think that this reveals a true undertone in American Christianity today... maybe all Western Christianity. It is the idea that those of us who are already Christians are done. We prayed a prayer or were baptized or whatever the particular sect uses as its conversion moment, and now we're done. The Message changed us and we are changed, there is nothing more that Christianity has to offer us until death. Now we exist only to get more people to become Christians. It's kind of like a cosmic pyramid scheme. And I believe that this correlates directly to the decline in church population in the US today, especially among young people. In our generation there is very little social pressure to be an active member of any faith. In the recent past, I believe, many people went to church because it was socially unacceptable not to, not because they felt like they benefited from the Christian faith at all. Today that social pressure is gone and the true state of affairs is apparent: people aren't interested in Christianity. And how could they be if this is all there is to it? Furthermore, if this is all there is why should I continue in faith after the conversion moment? Now, the Arminians among us believe that one's salvation is due to an ongoing faith (to put it simply), not some conversion moment. But we are certainly not the majority. If God is not active in our lives after the conversion, if there is no "life more abundant" on this Earth, if there is no continual movement towards Perfection, then churches should be replaced with drive-thrus. We are not machines that just need fixed and once fixed operate correctly. We live in a world full of pain, sorrow, and suffering. We live in a place that offers nothing but despair on its own. And if all God promised was a better life after this one then that would still be more than we deserved. But if He is offering a better life now, a life more abundant today, then isn't that infinitely better? If Christianity can ease the pain of everyday life, bring you closer to God before you die and allow you to begin living the life we long for now then it has real value everyday. And in that case it cannot be a one-dose solution. It must be something that changes you every day. Something that brings you to a God who reaches out and redeems the damned situations we find ourselves in day after day. My final thought is one that is now becoming cliche itself, so here's the sign I'll put on my proverbial church this week: "Jesus commanded that we make disciples, not converts"

To die, or not to die

Zacarias Moussaoui was convicted of being involved in the 9/11 plot and sentenced to life in prison five days ago. During his trial he frequently spoke out of turn, saying things about how America is evil and he is going to be a martyr and so on. He even plead guilty. Now he wants to change his plea (requires a free membership). He claims that, "he had not trusted the American legal system because he was not assigned a Muslim lawyer, and that his days in solitary confinement had provoked him to fight that system." Furthermore, he claims that "the jurors' decision to spare his life made him look at his situation anew," and now "he would welcome a trial where he could show he was not part of the 9/11 plot" in his own words: "'because I now see that it is possible that I can receive a fair trial even with Americans as jurors.'" I wasn't aware that it was even possible to change your plea after sentencing. In fact, its not. His lawyers, in their filing of his request, "acknowledged that the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure prohibit a defendant from withdrawing a guilty plea after he is sentenced" but submitted the request anyway, due to "'their problematic relationship with Moussaoui'" who "confounded" his lawyers with his outbursts and general bizarre behavior during the original trial.

What is interesting to me is that throughout his trial he antagonized the judge and jury claiming that he wanted to be a martyr. The government strongly urged the jurors to give him the death sentence, but instead they gave him life in prison. And now he wants to change his plea. Not when he was faced with death. Although he may be telling the truth and have a newfound faith in the American system, I am skeptical. My belief, or at least a theory that seems plausible to me, is this: he wanted to die. He antagonized the court in order to provoke them so they would hate him and give him the death penalty. Now that they haven't he is faced with decades in isolation in a maximum security prison. He wanted to fly planes into buildings to die as a martyr. When that didn't work he wanted to die at the hands of "infidels" so he could still be a martyr. When instead he was sentenced to life imprisonment, with no more chances at martyrdom, he tried to escape. He doesn't want another trial because he wants to be innocent, he wants another trial so he can get another shot at martyrdom.

I don't think that this conclusion seems remarkable to many, including those involved in his trial. I'm sure he won't get another trial since it is illegal for him to change his plea at this point. But it should make us consider our approach to people like him and the culture he comes from. Our culture values life above almost anything. That is reflected by the fact that Western soldiers from many countries often are taken prisoner in wars and do not fight to the death. We were confounded by the Japanese willingness to die for their country in World War II. This enemy is very similar. An "honorable" death is better than life. These men do not want to kill for their cause, they want to die for it. This makes confronting this threat much more complicated. Military power will not deter them. As the Soviets learned in Afghanistan, it doesn't matter how many you kill, they will not give up. We cannot simply overpower them unless we are going to kill every last one of them. There can be no surrender obtained through military action. We have to win men away from this cause while they are alive. We have to change minds and hearts. I'm not saying that military action should always be out of the question -- it may be that we have to prove that we are strong and willing to fight back before they will respect us at all. But we also have to understand that military action alone will not win this war and we need to have a plan in which military action is just one tactic, not our entire strategy.

Bill Gates: I wish I were better at acting humble

While studying for finals I came across this article. This article is about how Bill Gates doesn't really want to be the richest man alive. Check this quote out: " Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates told an advertising conference in Washington state that he'd prefer not to be the world's richest person.

'I wish I wasn't,' Gates said in the interview broadcast online."

I'm speechless, Bill. He acts like its a disease or something. You wish you weren't? I understand that when you have that much money it feels like an endless supply, but seriously, who does he think he's kidding? If he doesn't want to be the richest man alive he can certainly solve that problem. In fact, I'll help him out. Bill Gates, if you ever read this you have my word that I will gladly accept any sized gift (above $0) that you would like to give me to help remove some of your wealth. If we can get enough people to volunteer then we might be able to lower Gates' bottom line enough to make him the second richest man in the world.

In all seriousness, there are plenty of ways to spend $65 billion. He could pay off some of the national debt, if he wanted. Or pay off the debt for some third world country. Or give even more money to AIDS research. Or nuclear fusion research. Or just start sending big checks randomly (or to me). You get the idea.

I like reading articles like these. It always entertains me to see rich people and celebrities pretending like they'd rather not be, especially when they could easily cure the problem they complain about if they really wanted to. Bill Gates doesn't want to be anything but the richest man alive, or he would be.

NHL Playoffs, Round Two: the Western Conference is Crazy

So, first I'd like to brag that I correctly chose the winners of six out of eight series. I didn't get the number of games right in many cases, and I didn't make my predictions until after game 3, but whatever. The Flames lost, so not all the Northwest Division teams made it past the first round. However, something even cooler happened: all the top-seeded teams in the Western Conference were eliminated. That's right, numbers 5, 6, 7, and 8 are going on and 1-4 are out. I think that's pretty cool. The Eastern Conference is the exact opposite, all the top seeds are going on and the bottom four are out. So, that probably says something about differences between the two conferences. Here are my second round predictions, but I have to admit that the number of games is mostly a crap shoot.
Western Conference:

Avs beat the Mighty Ducks in 6 games -- the Ducks are good this year; they did force game 7 before beating the Flames after being down 3-2 in the series. However, I think that the matchup favors Colorado in most aspects -- we have a solid defense, a red-hot goalie, and a formidible four-line attack that features a few great scoring lines as well as some grinders. I love the Avs, I'm sure I'm not objective.

Sharks beat the Oilers in 7 games -- The real matchup here will be Roloson vs. Thornton+Cheechoo. My prediction is that in the end the league's leading scorer will crack Dwayne Roloson, talented as he is.

Eastern Conference:

Sabres beat the Senators in 7 games -- this is a really tough one, but I think the Sabres played with a lot more energy and intensity than the Senators last round, in my opinion.

Hurricanes beat the Devils in 6 games -- this is another tough one. But again I'm looking at last round. The Devils steam-rolled the Rangers with little competition. It'll be hard for them to gear up to play the Hurricanes. The Hurricanes, on the other hand, just came from being down 2-0 in the first series. They have some good momentum and intensity built up after that.

Not all the series will probably go as long as I've predicted, but I don't feel good enough about any of my choices to predict a faster finish. I thought that many of the series last round were incredibly exciting and I found the games very entertaining to watch. And I think its only going to get better with these new matchups.

NHL Playoffs

I love hockey. And I love the Avalanche. I have a big post almost ready about the purpose of church services, but I haven't finished it yet because I'm too absorbed with the NHL playoffs (that's not really true, I'm busy with other things too, but it makes me sound more obsessed).

Anyone who follows hockey will agree, the "new NHL" has been a huge success and this years playoffs are some of the best I've ever seen. Notably, the 7th-seeded teams in both divisions are doing quite well against the 2nd-seeded (the number 7 Avs lead the series 3-0 over the number 2 Stars). Furthermore, Edmonton, the 8th seed, is tied 2-2 with the number 1 Red Wings, and that's only after the Red Wings won last night after being down 2-1. Any playoff series that involves low seeds contending or beating high-seeds is exciting -- especially when its "your" team. I didn't expect the Avalanche to fare well at all against the Stars. The Stars have been phenomenal this year, and the Avs have been... slightly above average. However, the Avs are in the most competitive division in the NHL. In the new NHL each team plays even more intra-divisional games than before. And I think this adds an interesting twist on the playoffs because, as with college football, the team with the best record may not be the best team if they had a weaker "strength of schedule." The fact that three of the eight teams in the Western Conference quaterfinals are from the Northwest Division. Furthermore, two of those teams are underdogs hanging with or dominating the higher seed they are playing.

Its been a very exciting first two weeks of the playoffs for me. Here are my hopes for the first round, although I don't know how realistic they are at this point. Really I just think it would be awesome if all the Northwest Division teams win their first round games, and I want the Red Wings to lose because I hate them, and that way we (the Avalanche... I'm totally on a "we" basis with the Avalanche) don't have to play them next round:

Avalanche beat the Stars in 4 games (sweep 'em, baby!)
Oilers beat the Red Wings in 7 games
Flames beat the Mighty Ducks in 7 games
Sharks beat the Predators in 5 games

I'm not as interested in the Eastern Conference. I don't really like the way they play in the Eastern Conference. Even with the new rules their games seem lethargic and lack an intensity that the Western Conference has. Not all the teams, New Jersey and Buffalo especially don't play this way. But enough of them that the Eastern Conference seems boring to me. If Ottawa wins their conference it will be a very interesting Stanley Cup finals, since Ottawa is generally a more boring team to watch. If New Jersey or Buffalo win, or even the Flyers, then it will be more like a Western Conference series. Here are my predictions for the Eastern Conference:

Senators beat the Lightning in 6 games
Devils beat the Rangers in 4 games
Canadiens beat the Hurricanes in 5 games (not sure at all about this one)
Sabres beat the Flyers in 6 games (maybe 7)

I know this post has nothing to do with what we normally talk about, but I'm way into the NHL playoffs right now but wanted to update my blog so it doesn't idle for another month. So here's something to talk about.