Yesterday's post is a great example of how a site gains popularity. I found a new site that I love, and I wanted everyone to know about it. Since this site is only as effective as the quality of the opinions that debate here, the more we can spread the word about it, the smarter we'll all become. So, I've tried to make it as easy as possible for you to share particular posts you find interesting on Facebook, Twitter and other social sites. If you look at the bottom of each post, you'll see a "Share" toolbar. By hovering over this toolbar, and clicking on your site of choice, you'll instantly post a link of that particular post to your wall or microblog and help recruit new opinions for that day, and hopefully for the long term. I love the brains we currently have on this site, and I'm grateful to how much I've learned in the past few years because of you all. Now, let's make this place even better. Next time you like a post, click the "Share" toolbar, put it on your Facebook wall and let's get some new opinions in the mix here.

"For Christians who hate Christian music." Now, I've talked about this idea for a long time. In fact, that's the real point behind my band, Relevant Reverence. I often received compliments of my music along the lines of, "I wish more Christian music was like this." And my response was always, "I'm sure there's a lot of guys like me in their basements making awesome stuff. There's just no way to hear it." Turns out that show-runner Pete has been introducing the world to independent artsy Christian music through The Bored-Again Christian Podcast for years now. I just found about it a couple days ago, and can't recommend it highly enough. If you like the "idea" of great Christian indie-rock, but assume it must suck, give this a listen.

Yes, as a musician, I'm saying that. My friend made fun of me when I told him I only make concept albums -  as if a "concept album" is simply some weird experimental leap at trying to tell an entire story through a series of songs. But, what's the point of an album if that's not what you're doing? Giving your listeners a small price-point break? 14 songs for $10 instead of $14 to buy those $0.99 songs separately. But how many of those songs do you really love? 1 or 2 on average? Just buy the singles. Because with most bands, there's no bigger story being told. Of course, if you want to learn the entire story of the prodigal son, you better buy the whole thing.

On a recent flight, I accidentally left a Timothy Keller book called "The Reason for God" in the seatback in front of me. Now, let's pretend it was an Organic Cooking magazine instead. If someone on the next flight sat down and had some vague interest in cooking, they might have taken this as a sign from God that they were to read/explore the benefits of organic cooking. But, no one's going to think "The Reason for God" was an accidental leave-behind. And likely, the person on the next flight is going to assume that I'm trying to silently solicit them. How does this example effect how you might try to persuade people?

"Those who can - do. Those who can't - teach." H.L. Mencken Is it possible that we don't value public school teachers enough as we should because we don't pay directly for their services? Because if we did, I'd argue that we'd instantly love them. Otherwise, we'd have to blame ourselves because we're the idiots paying for shoddy work.

Not to say he ever had me. We disagree on many things. But, I really liked the guy. He looks good and sounds great. But, for all of the rhetoric about changing the game in Washington, the dude is absolutely playing it. Just a few days after the State of the Union address, Obama met with the GOP directly to answer some of the questions they had.

First, massive kudos for him agreeing to this. It is in situations like this where the truth really comes out. That's why my ideal presidential debate during the campaign would have been for Al Franken to have interviewed McCain and Rush Limbaugh to have interviewed Obama. You get to the heart of things a lot quicker.

I had been under the impression (based solely on Obama's rhetoric during and pre-SOTU address) that the Republicans have posed no solutions to the healthcare debate whatsoever, and were simply the party of "no". Sound familiar, right? After listening to this speech, Obama admits that the Republicans have written and submitted countless comprehensive healthcare proposals over the past year.

Feel free to listen to this if you have a free hour some time. It's great stuff. But, it absolutely enraged me at the same time.



What Obama is really interested in is NOT Republican ideas, but what they need changed in one of the working democrat proposals in order to actually VOTE for it. And this makes total sense. The Republicans are the minority party. They don't get to call the shots. But, I feel like Obama could provide the whole country with some insight to this debate with a 2-minute HONEST monologue. But, for some reason, he thinks this game makes more sense.

In 1926, it started as Negro History Week. Since then, it's grown to become Black History Month. When will we stop separating black America's achievements from our country's history? Watch this quick Morgan Freeman clip on his thoughts about Black History Month. Then, let me know why I'm wrong to agree with him.

#29. Warren G. Harding

Capo 3
A, C, G, D/F#

names warren g
like the rapper
Im a gangsta
Underneath this tweed and the powder in my hair
Administration entourage the death of me
Their costly choices, my legacy

Talking about low friends
In high places
Talking about me and my home-slices
Run the gambit crime and more disgraces
Teapot dome scandal tops these cases

Secretary of the interior, albert fall
Was my homey, my boy, and the worst one of all
He took a 100 gs on the side
Leasing out our oil reserves in Wyoming
Something he couldnt hide
this temptation led to litigation a great great stain upon this great nation

Are Cuban cigars really the best cigars in the world? Or is it the simple fact that they're illegal that makes us want to enjoy them so much? ...like the sweet sweet taste of bootleg liquor.

a quick continuation from our conversation before the break. Our last commenter said, "I thought faith was belief WITHOUT evidence. I thought that was the point." That's exactly what I'm arguing against.  I think the reason for this definition, particularly from those within the church, stems from a misunderstanding of the verse from Hebrews 11: 1, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." First of all, whenever you read the English word "faith" in the New Testament, the original greek word is a form of the word "pistos", which really means trust. And by "what we do not see", I do not believe this means trust in the physically invisible, but trust in things that have simply not yet come to pass. So, rather than confidence in a promise from one who has proven themselves trustworthy, that verse could become a full rationalization for believing in any claimed supreme being/tooth fairy. I don't believe in the resurrection because I would like to believe in the resurrection. I believe in it because I am convinced it occurred.