Star Trek: Of Gods and Men (full trailer)

Star Trek: Of Gods and Men (full trailer)




See this is what Paramount gets when they drop the ball with Star Trek and put out JUNK like the last 2 seasons of "Enterprise", fans team up with the stars and make their own movies!

Keith Olberman again... Says it best!

You have to watch this !

Cut and past the following link into your web browser

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=3ef5ad97-15c0-42da-b389-c9365d38ae0f&f=00&fg=copy

A bit of excitement last night

A warehouse at the end of my street caught fire last night. Four SFFD units responded VERY quickly and kept the blaze from spreading to the large Apartment building next door. The photos were shot with my cell phone camera.

Psalm Sunday Sermons and Soundbytes

Warning: I am about to mix religion and politics so hang on...

" I'd rather see sermon than hear one any day."

-Waite Phillips,
Founder, Phillips Petroleum

I know it may seem strange to some to begin a piece on religion by quoting a famous oil executive, but we live in pretty weird times. So it seemed appropriate.

I can't count how often over the past 4 months I have heard the pundits of talk radio and cable news talk about which candidate will be embraced by "Values Voters."

I am always amused by that term. It suggests that only a select group of Americans take their personal values into account when choosing a elected official. The truth of course is the term is a code word . When the alphabet soup of cable news shows say "Values Voters" they mean conservative evangelicals. There is a popular perception that in order to be favored with the support of this particular group a candidate must first "prove" that he or she has embraced their values and beliefs, and by values, they mean a candidate's stance on abortion, gay rights, immigration and stem cell research.

Yet, just like the values voters of GOP I attend church regularly, I belong to an established faith, and take the values and faith of candidates into account when I step into the voting booth. Yet I will confess my definition of faith and values probably differs somewhat from the voters that Focus on the Family sends pre election mailings out to.

Over the next year, we will hear a lot of talk about values. We already have heard the GOP try to scare up votes with the specter of Speaker Pelosi and "San Francisco Values". Well I live in San Francisco, and I may not have much in common with James Dobson and Pat Robertson, but like most Americans I too am a values voter.

Let me take a moment to tell you what is important to this "values voter".

My faith tells me that where charity and hope are there God is. So I am looking for candidate who understands that having 48 million Americans with out health insurance is morally wrong.

My faith tells me that respect for my elders is a good thing. So I am looking for a candidate who understands that the contract with and promises made to, all generations of Americans through social security, Medicare and Medicaid are not negotiable and must be kept.

My faith tells me that the greatest commandment is to love one another. So I am looking candidate who sees war not as tool for commerce or even domestic political gain but as a true last resort. A candidate who sees the lives of our men and women in uniform as far too sacred to risk on whim or to advance a political or economic agenda.

My faith tells me to be suspicious of people who pray loudly and make their faith a public display. So I look for actions to tell me what candidate believes rather than just words said at fundraisers and prayer breakfasts.

Having looked at all the declared and perhaps soon to declare presidential candidates here is what this religious values voter sees.

I see candidates who are scrambling to redefine themselves to sell their candidacy. I see candidates who make statements and promises that are in total contradiction of things they have said and done only a few years ago. I see candidates desperate to show how he or she harbors the same prejudice against certain Americans as as the groups whose campaign contribution checks they are desperate to collect and cash do.

The best way I know to sum what I am looking for in a "Values Candidate" is to quote a banner on the Edwards campaign website . "Tomorrow Begins Today."

Neo-Conservative Evangelicals seem to be obsessed with the idea of when the "end times" are coming, and even what they can do to help hurry that along.

Yet as a Christian , my faith tells me that the true work of kingdom of God is found here and now. The bible doesn't say blessed are those "waiting around to be raptured." My faith clearly says blessed are the peacemakers, blessed are those of work for justice and who persecuted for standing up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. My faith tells me this planet we live on is a gift and the stewardship of that gift is our responsibility.

My faith and values compel me to find a candidate who understands that tomorrow really does start today. A candidate who can inspire and motivate Americans of all ages and backgrounds to start now to build a better future. A candidate who will show me a sermon by living a faith that resonates with my values, rather than scrambling to convince me that they have the same fears and prejudices that I do.

A true values candidate will embrace my hopes, not play on my fears.

A real values voter understands that the time to work for universal health care is now, the time to stand up and oppose this insane misadventure in Iraq is now, the time to work for real dialog in the Middle East is now. The time to address the issues that impact our environment is now.

Nowhere does the Christian faith say it is ok to ignore these issues because the "end times are near so we don't have to worry about it. "

As a values voter, I would rather see a sermon than hear one any day. So when I hear candidates talk about faith and values, talk is pretty cheap. For me it is actions that speak loud and clear.

A San Franciscan's Dilema

"Don't give them any money, they'll use it to by drugs or booze!" A friend of mine scolded me the other day as I handed a homeless man on Market Street a dollar.

In all honesty he was probably right. Yet it is hard to just "walk by" a man lying on the ground who clearly has not spent a night indoors in a very long time. It is the greatest civic issue facing San Francisco. Our mass of homeless. For years the homeless migrated here for the mild winter, and for cash. The city used to hand out cash to the homeless in lieu of services. Until recently San Francisco had  the highest cash grants to the homeless in the country —nearly $400 a month, and recipients were not required to prove residency or even citizenship.    Well you can imagine what that did. It turned San Francisco into a magnet for the homeless.

I know this for a fact because there was a guy who always used to ask me for spare change on LaSalle Street in Chicago, and last winter, I saw him with his same cardboard sign on Market Street here in San Francisco. I asked him how he got here , and he told me he got enough money together for a bus ticket and came here. He had been told by other homeless, that SF handed out cash to people living on the streets. He was annoyed to discover when he got here, that the practice had ended shortly after a new Mayor took office.

It was  Mayor Gavin Newsom, who started "Care not Cash". A program where instead of getting money, the homeless get housing and other assistance. It has made a difference. In the time I have lived here, as  there has been a reported drop in the number of homeless on the streets. Yet, critics of the program say the impact has been minimal, and still doesnt address what they see as the root causes of homelessness. Critics of those critics, say the "homeless advocates" are apologists for drug use and petty crime, and dont want people to have to take responsilbity for themselves.  Reality as always, probably lies somewhere in the middle.

Yet this past week the homeless seemed to be everywhere. Maybe it's just good old Lutheran Lenten guilt, but it seemed everywhere I went over the past three days, I was asked for spare change .   It got to the point where I just didn't want to make eye contact with anyone anymore. And I felt really crappy about it too. Yet in all truth what good is one dollar, or a hand full of change going to do this person? What they really need is housing, substance abuse rehab and mental and medical health services. None of which I usually carry in my pockets as I walk down Market Street.

The rational side of my brain is quick to remind me that I give every month to my church, which in turn supports programs like the San Francisco Night Ministry. Which does try to provide those real needs I just mentioned. So why do I still feel so rotten when I pretend not to hear "spare any change?" from the guy with the paper cup? Part of the problem is despite programs like Mayor Newsom's the number of homeless that I see doesn't seem to be going down.

Yet I could give every cent I have to every homeless person I see and it wouldn't do anything to help solve the problem. So I keep walking avoiding eye contact and lamenting the fact that in spite of all the non profits, churches and social services working to aid the homeless in this city, it still seemed to boil down to someone asking me for change as I tried to make my way home.

I really dont have a point to make here. I hope that as we move into Holy Week and Passover,  everyone who reads this will find one organization that does good work, and donate to it. Be it the Red Cross, a church, a food bank or shelter. Maybe if we all did, it would accomplish something.

We take a brief break from Politics...

To bring you this moment for The Arts. Ah... Culture!

Let's Make the GOP Decide...

It’s time to give the GOP what they want. I’m serious. I am fed up with a Democratic congressional majority that is still functioning like an opposition minority. The time has come to use the power of majority to make the Republican Party and the Bush Administration put their money where their mouths are.

The War in Iraq:

The Bush Administration will get full funding for as long a surge as the President wants. On the following conditions:

- All the Bush Administration’s tax cuts are repealed and no new tax cuts for any of the upper tax brackets can be enacted so long as a single US Soldier is in Iraq

- No company or subsidiary of any company headquartered outside the United States is eligible for ANY government contracts.

- No future contracts may be awarded without competitive bid and approval by the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.

- All VA services and facilities must be fully funded. This must be done without increasing the federal budget deficit. Even if that means taxes must be increased to pay for it.

- “Don’t’ Ask, Don’t Tell” is repealed and LGBT Americans must be allowed to serve openly in the Armed Forces.

A Constitutional Amendment banning Gay Marriage:

The Bush Administration gets to give the far right the gift it has wanted to give for 6 years. Only, however on the following conditions:

- Gay and Lesbian Americans are able to claim the total cost per taxpayer of the over 1000 federal marriage benefits, the cost of marriage licensing, divorce and family courts, and child welfare services as a federal income tax deduction.

- Gays and Lesbians, as the only group now constitutionally barred from passing on social security survivor benefits will be the ONLY group given the option to invest their social security funds as they see fit.

- The creation of a Federal Divorce Tax

The Environment & Climate Change:

The Bush Administration gets it’s way on carbon emissions, oil drilling and mileage standards on cars. Only on the following conditions:

- Any new American vehicle that gets less than 20 miles per gallon is subject to annual federal tax of 25% of the original sticker price.

- Oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge must be conducted under the supervision of the World Wildlife Fund, and all oil profits derived from such drilling are subject to a new Federal Environmental Protection Tax of 20%

- Any American who buys a gas-electric hybrid can deduct 25% of the original sticker price annually from their federal taxes.

George W. Bush wants an open ended war? Fine. Then his “base” is going to have to pay their fair share of the bill for it. The GOP wants to use LGBT Americans as their political scapegoats? Fine. Then they will have to vote for a gay only tax cut. You can’t deny people equal citizenship and then tax them as equal citizens. George W. Bush wants to ignore climate change? Fine. Then his “base” will have to pay the real financial costs of that stupidity.

The Bush Administration and the Republicans have claimed for years that their agenda is good for America but have never been willing to step up and pay the resulting costs. Well now is their chance to prove the critics wrong. I say give President Bush and the GOP what they want, AND make them pay the real price for it. Then watch Republicans run from their own “agenda” faster than Karl Rove leaking a CIA Agent’s name.

It’s time we made this election debate one of “either/or”. Either you are for one America where we all have opportunity, security and equality or you are not . Either you believe all Americans are entitled to the rights and privileges enshrined in our constitution or you don’t. Either you believe that government is of the people, by the people and for the people, or you believe it to be a tool for the enrichment of a select view. Either you believe that mankind has a responsibility to be noble stewards of our natural world or you see the environment as a disposable asset to be exploited for short term gain at any cost.

It’s time we made this election to be what it truly is. A referendum on what kind of nation we are, and would wish to be.

Ann Coulter Proves why she is Queen of Crazy

Speaking today at the Conservative Political Action Conference, right-wing pundit Ann Coulter said: “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.” Audience members said “ohhh” and then cheered

I would post a long detailed response to her/it but Henry Rollins does so much better! Enjoy!


">

525,600 Minutes...

As part of the year long celebration of our restored building St. Mark's Lutheran Church here in San Francisco held a special screening of the motion picture musical "RENT".

What made it really cool was we showed the film in the church sanctuary, one of the actual locations used in the filming the movie. The funeral scene (reprise of "I will cover you ",) was filmed at St. Marks.

It was a great evening with the profits from admission going to the ELCA worldwide Hunger campaign.

From Today's New York Times

Editorial
Not Supporting Our Troops
Published: February 15, 2007

How do you explain to the thousands of American troops now being poured into Baghdad that they will have to wait until the summer for the protective armor that could easily mean the difference between life and death?

It’s bad enough that these soldiers are being asked to risk their lives without President Bush demanding that Iraq’s leaders take any political risks that might give the military mission at least an outside chance of success. But according to an article in The Washington Post this week, at least some of the troops will be sent out in Humvees not yet equipped with FRAG Kit 5 armor. That’s an advanced version designed to reduce deaths from roadside bombs, which now account for about 70 percent of United States casualties in Iraq.

The more flexible materials used in the FRAG Kit 5 make it particularly helpful in containing the damage done by the especially deadly weapon the Bush administration is now most concerned about: those explosively formed penetrators that Washington accuses Iran of supplying to Shiite militias for use against American troops.

Older versions of Humvee armor are shattered by these penetrators, showering additional shrapnel in the direction of a Humvee’s occupants. The FRAG Kit 5 helps slow the incoming projectile and contains some of the shrapnel, giving the soldiers a better chance of survival.

Armor upgrades like this have become a feature of the Iraq war, as the Pentagon struggles to keep up with the constantly more powerful weapons and sophisticated tactics of the various militia and insurgent forces attacking American troops. But the Army, the National Guard and the Marine Corps have been caught constantly behind the curve.

Unglamorous and relatively inexpensive staples of ground combat, like armor, have never really captured the imagination and attention of military contractors and Pentagon budget-makers the way that “Top Gun” fighter jets, stealthy warships and “Star Wars” missile interceptors generally do.

The Army says it is now accelerating its production of FRAG Kit 5 armor and handing it out to Baghdad-bound units on a priority basis. But it acknowledges that the armor upgrading project will not be completed until summer. Right now, it’s February, and the new American drive in Baghdad has already begun.

That’s a shame, if not an outright scandal, because up-to-date armor is essential for saving American lives.

Congress Debates Iraq... Again.

“I'm just a bill.
Yes, I'm only a bill.
And I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill.
But I know I'll be a law someday…
… At least I hope and pray that I will,
But today I am still just a bill.”
- Schoolhouse Rock

A threat to morale of our troops? A source of aid and comfort to our enemies? An attack on our own soldiers and their families? What could the United States House of Representatives possibly be debating that would warrant those dire predictions from House Republicans? Is Congress debating an instant whole scale pullout from Iraq? No. Is the House urging that the United States negotiate with Osama Bin Laden? Nope. Then it must be a debate over impeaching the President of the United States right? No, not even close.

The House of Representatives is debating HR 157. A non binding bit of political theater that does nothing more than say that a simple majority of the members of the House feel that the current plan to send 20,000 plus additional troops to Iraq is a bad idea.

As my nephew would say …. Well Duh!

I watched the debate on CSPAN as did many Americans and what struck me was how both sides of the aisle in congress basically want the same thing. They want to blame the other side for Iraq. Democrats won the 2006 midterm elections on this issue. The American people issued a loud and clear vote of no confidence in President Bush’s approach to and leadership of the war in Iraq. The message was clear, the message was unambiguous and it was unmistakable. Get our troops out of Iraq.

Over 70% of the American people say they are opposed to proposed troop surge and the current strategy in Iraq. Yet Speaker Pelosi can’t bring a bill to the floor that simply says the President will have no money to send additional troops and he must start to redeploy the troops currently in Iraq.

Over the course of the debate on HR 157 I heard a parade of Republicans say that to have a debate in our legislative branch of government on the issue of this war emboldens our enemies. Yet for 5 years those same Republicans kept saying that the terrorists attacked us because they “hate our freedoms”. So now our freedoms are emboldening the terrorists so we better not exercise them? Which is it?

Over the course of the debate on HR 157 I heard the same parade of Republicans say you can’t support the troops if you don’t support their mission.

If the mission is wrong, if the mission is fatally flawed , if the mission is ill-conceived, poorly planned and failing then the only true way to support the troops is to oppose the mission. The only true way to support the troops is to change the mission.. To continue to support a failed strategy is to deliberately place our troops in harms way. It is to deliberately and knowingly sacrifice the lives of America’s bravest and best to avoid admitting a mistake.

To support the proposed troop surge in Iraq is to attack our troops and their families not support them.

But rather than stand up and say that, the congressional Democrats promptly danced around the issue. They want to stop the surge, but they don’t want to stop the money, because stopping the money can be spun by Republicans as cutting off support to our troops. And make no mistake, for the Republicans that is their holy grail. This debate is not about winning the “War on Terror”, it isn’t even about Iraq. For the GOP it is about campaign ads in 2008 where they can claim the Democrats didn’t support our troops. It is not about winning the war, it is about winning back a congressional majority.

And sadly, the Democrats fell for it. For the Democrats in Congress it isn’t about Iraq either. It is about a paralyzing fear of those potential GOP campaign ads in 2008. It is not about ending this absurd misbegotten war, it is about a fear of losing their congressional majority.

Never before in American history as there been such a pronounced absence of rational leadership in our federal government. Congress is fiddling while Iraq burns, fueled by a sectarian civil war and American lives. The President of The United States, who twice swore a oath on the bible to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, has made his legacy one of ignoring it.

The time has come to stand up. The time has come to pull our government, our nation and our democracy back from the cliff that this Administration would lead us all off of, and which Congress would follow like lemmings to the sea. The time has come for leadership.

Then maybe we will get actual solutions, instead of just another bill.">

It's Time To Stand Up.

">

John Edwards at the winter DNC meeting.

Presidential Candidate Spotlight

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson

Presidential Candidate Spotlight

New York Senator Hilliary Rodham Clinton

Presidential Candidate Spotlight

Illinois Senator Barak Obama

Presidential Campaign Spotlight

Over the next few weeks, I will be featuring introductions to the various declared candidates for President of The United States in 2008

I will feature both democrats and republicans but as there are more currently declared democrats we will start there. In the interest of full disclosure I will confess I currently have a candidate I support. Senator John Edwards, so we will begin there.

Honoring Martin Luther King, Jr.

John Edwards spoke Sunday at the historic Riverside Church in New York. He called on members of the House and Senate to take a stand and block funding of Bush's escalation of the war in Iraq, saying:

"If you're in Congress and you know this war is going in the wrong direction, it is no longer enough to study your options and keep your own counsel.

"Silence is betrayal. Speak out, and stop this escalation now. You have the power to prohibit the president from spending any money to escalate the war — use it."

Nearly 40 years ago, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. announced his opposition to the war in Vietnam from the same pulpit."

You can speak up with Senator Edwards and honor the memory of Martin Luther King by addiong your voice to block funding for escalation by calling your Senators directly.

Click on the video to hear excerpts of Senator Edwards's address.

Keith Olberman (again) Gets it Right!

">

His Special Comment on the Bush plan to escalate is nothing short of BRILLIANT Watch the video- & tell everyone you know to check it out...

Back Home from London

Made it home Friday. London was (as always) AMAZING! One week was far far too short. Oh well back the grind on monday... the pic was taken last Wednesday from the London Eye. :)

More from London

Some of the huge fireworks display we saw here in London on new years eve

two more days here then back to the states!