It seems like the days are going by way too fast. I can't believe it is already May, I can't believe Tessa is 5 months old, I can't believe it is time for summer, I can't believe Grant and Claire are getting so old. I can't believe we are almost halfway through 2007. Time seems to be travelling faster and faster. As a kid, time would move slowly. Christmas and summer break always seemed so far away. Now, I am sure tomorrow will be Christmas, and I won't know where the year went. I kind of feel like Desmond on Lost sometimes.
It's not just me. The older you get, the faster time travels. I remember the lady we bought our first home from swore everything in the house was new or replaced "last year." Oftentimes, it turned out to be 10 or 15 years, but she honestly thought it was new.
Here's my theory though on why time travels faster when we get older. (Maybe everybody knows this, but sometimes these kind of things fascinate me.) When you are 1, one year is 100 percent of your life. When you are 5 years old, one year is 20 percent of your life. That's a lot. When you are 10, one year is 10 percent. Now that I am 31, one year is 3.2 percent of my life. So every year, the year equates to less of a percentage of my life than the year before, making it seem to go faster.
I guess this is why I still think of the 1990s as just being a couple of years ago. Time in percentage to my life travels much faster than when I was in the 90s looking back at the 1980s. Oh well, that's just my thought for the day. To all of you oldies out there who are reading this, don't take too long, or another year will pass for you.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Monday, May 21, 2007
The Historic Arlington Restaurant Tour: Part 1 - Catfish Sam's
A few weeks ago, I decided that Jessica and I, along with some of our friends, should experience historic Arlington eateries. After presenting the idea to our friends, the date was set. So Saturday evening, eight of us made our first stop on the "Division Street Restaurant Tour" at Catfish Sam's.
In my 31 years of life, 29 of which have been in Arlington, I have eaten at many Arlington locations. However, this was only my second visit to Catfish Sam's. The logo of a red, smiling catfish both on the wall of the restaurant and on the sign draws attention to this old building in west Arlington. Its location obviously leaves something to be desired. (For many years, I have said that if mayor, my first action would be to rent a bulldozer and drive it down both sides of a large portion of Division Street.) The building has no windows, so once inside, you have no clue what the weather or lighting is like outside; however, it was not too dark and the atmosphere was pleasant.
I drove by Catfish Sam's about 6:30pm on Saturday and the parking lot was packed; however, by the time we met there for dinner, it was 8:00pm and the main older crowd had already come and gone. Even so, the presence of the 8 of us around the age of 30, lowered the average age of the clients considerably while we were there. Also, the volume of laughter coming from our table raised the decibel level quite considerably. As we were finishing our meal, the place was ready to close, but the staff never rushed us, which was very nice.
Food wise, Catfish Sam's is pretty good. There is nothing like the hush puppies, I must have eaten close to a basket full. (They remind me of Bill Martin's Catfish place that used to be on the way home from Waco.) The little circular appetizer dish served confused me a little. A little dish of slaw, beans, pickles, okra, and onions is served at each table. (If you only order this, you are charged $4+ for this strange arrangement.) I ordered catfish and fries, which were pretty good. The fries were better than average; however, my catfish was just average. It was a little tough on the outside, but good on the inside. But really, we are not going to these restaurants for just the food. The ability of a place like this to have survived and thrived for over 50 years is what is most impressive to me. When a recent poll was conducted, Arlington residents listed On the Border as their favorite restaurant. One of the main criticisms of Arlington's food is its lack of original, local spots to eat. There is nothing fancy about Catfish Sam's, and yet, you can see why it has stayed in business, even without the most ideal of locations. It has never changed, the food is consistently good, and the prices are relatively reasonable. On a scale of 1 to 10, I would give Catfish Sam's an 8.
We had a great time on stop #1. Next time, we are going to head east on Division to one of my childhood favorites: Arlington Steak House.
In my 31 years of life, 29 of which have been in Arlington, I have eaten at many Arlington locations. However, this was only my second visit to Catfish Sam's. The logo of a red, smiling catfish both on the wall of the restaurant and on the sign draws attention to this old building in west Arlington. Its location obviously leaves something to be desired. (For many years, I have said that if mayor, my first action would be to rent a bulldozer and drive it down both sides of a large portion of Division Street.) The building has no windows, so once inside, you have no clue what the weather or lighting is like outside; however, it was not too dark and the atmosphere was pleasant.
I drove by Catfish Sam's about 6:30pm on Saturday and the parking lot was packed; however, by the time we met there for dinner, it was 8:00pm and the main older crowd had already come and gone. Even so, the presence of the 8 of us around the age of 30, lowered the average age of the clients considerably while we were there. Also, the volume of laughter coming from our table raised the decibel level quite considerably. As we were finishing our meal, the place was ready to close, but the staff never rushed us, which was very nice.
Food wise, Catfish Sam's is pretty good. There is nothing like the hush puppies, I must have eaten close to a basket full. (They remind me of Bill Martin's Catfish place that used to be on the way home from Waco.) The little circular appetizer dish served confused me a little. A little dish of slaw, beans, pickles, okra, and onions is served at each table. (If you only order this, you are charged $4+ for this strange arrangement.) I ordered catfish and fries, which were pretty good. The fries were better than average; however, my catfish was just average. It was a little tough on the outside, but good on the inside. But really, we are not going to these restaurants for just the food. The ability of a place like this to have survived and thrived for over 50 years is what is most impressive to me. When a recent poll was conducted, Arlington residents listed On the Border as their favorite restaurant. One of the main criticisms of Arlington's food is its lack of original, local spots to eat. There is nothing fancy about Catfish Sam's, and yet, you can see why it has stayed in business, even without the most ideal of locations. It has never changed, the food is consistently good, and the prices are relatively reasonable. On a scale of 1 to 10, I would give Catfish Sam's an 8.
We had a great time on stop #1. Next time, we are going to head east on Division to one of my childhood favorites: Arlington Steak House.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Falwell's Legacy...Good and Bad
With the passing of Jerry Falwell went one of the more colorful, entertaining, passionate, and maddening religious political figures in American history. There is no doubt that Falwell will have a lasting effect and influence on American politics. His Moral Majority, founded in 1979, not only is credited for helping elect Ronald Reagan, but also paved the way for others, such as Pat Robertson and the Christians Coalition, and James Dobson and the Family Research Council, to become major political figures in American politics. One could argue that without Falwell as the catalyst, the Religious Right would not be the major political player that it is today. And the Republican party would not have won so many elections without it either.
I must admit - and with no disrespect to his passing - I am no Falwell fan. It's not necessarily his political views - I agree with a great deal of them - but rather, it was his method. Falwell's political style was based less on humility and more on power, less on grace and more on legalism, less on love and more on divisiveness. Sometimes I wonder whether Falwell did more harm than good for Christianity as a whole. He politicized evangelicalism - the Good News became political mantra. While I appreciate his pro-life position, his inflammatory rhetoric caused many to turn a deaf ear to his message. Insinuating that homosexuals were the cause of 9/11 or that anyone who disagreed with him was probably a communist didn't open dialogue to discuss issues further, but rather isolated him to the fringes of society.
Earlier in his ministry, Falwell said, "Preachers are not called to be politicians… but to be soul winners." Why the change? The sexual revolution of the 60s and Roe v Wade were major ingredients in his shift. But the breaking point was the disillusionment many conservatives had with evangelical Jimmy Carter. When Carter's politics conflicted with conservative evangelicals, Falwell and others felt the need to act politically: "As a pastor, I kept waiting for someone to come to the forefront of the American religious scene to lead the way out of the wilderness. Like thousands of other preachers, I kept waiting, but no real leader appeared. Finally, I realized that we had to act ourselves."
And so Falwell began the Moral Majority - and gained much influence and power. He had access to the White House, he was interviewed by TV shows, and his face became recognizable throughout most of America and the world. And then, as it always does, the power corrupted. Every time in the world's history, when church and state mix, the church loses. Politics is about winning, which leads to compromise, which leads to abandonment of principles, which results in a political organization that once was religious. As I always warn myself and others, if your politics and your faith never conflict, then more than likely your politics is informing your faith, rather than your faith informing your politics. The Moral Majority, and subsequent organizations, lost their prophetic role and became pawns for the political parties. It happens on both sides of the aisle. Just as Falwell fell into the Republican power game, Jim Wallis is currently married to the Democratic power grab.
And so where are we in today's society? How does the world perceive Christians? As those who bring the Good News or those who wag their finger in others' faces? As those who seek to love one another, or as those who protest television shows? As those who seek to save the lost or those who judge the lost for not being responsible?
Love him or hate him, Falwell has left his mark on our American political system. But now, perhaps it is time for evangelicals to reclaim part of what has been lost and proclaim the entire Good News of Jesus Christ rather than just the contemporary partisan political hot-button issues.
I must admit - and with no disrespect to his passing - I am no Falwell fan. It's not necessarily his political views - I agree with a great deal of them - but rather, it was his method. Falwell's political style was based less on humility and more on power, less on grace and more on legalism, less on love and more on divisiveness. Sometimes I wonder whether Falwell did more harm than good for Christianity as a whole. He politicized evangelicalism - the Good News became political mantra. While I appreciate his pro-life position, his inflammatory rhetoric caused many to turn a deaf ear to his message. Insinuating that homosexuals were the cause of 9/11 or that anyone who disagreed with him was probably a communist didn't open dialogue to discuss issues further, but rather isolated him to the fringes of society.
Earlier in his ministry, Falwell said, "Preachers are not called to be politicians… but to be soul winners." Why the change? The sexual revolution of the 60s and Roe v Wade were major ingredients in his shift. But the breaking point was the disillusionment many conservatives had with evangelical Jimmy Carter. When Carter's politics conflicted with conservative evangelicals, Falwell and others felt the need to act politically: "As a pastor, I kept waiting for someone to come to the forefront of the American religious scene to lead the way out of the wilderness. Like thousands of other preachers, I kept waiting, but no real leader appeared. Finally, I realized that we had to act ourselves."
And so Falwell began the Moral Majority - and gained much influence and power. He had access to the White House, he was interviewed by TV shows, and his face became recognizable throughout most of America and the world. And then, as it always does, the power corrupted. Every time in the world's history, when church and state mix, the church loses. Politics is about winning, which leads to compromise, which leads to abandonment of principles, which results in a political organization that once was religious. As I always warn myself and others, if your politics and your faith never conflict, then more than likely your politics is informing your faith, rather than your faith informing your politics. The Moral Majority, and subsequent organizations, lost their prophetic role and became pawns for the political parties. It happens on both sides of the aisle. Just as Falwell fell into the Republican power game, Jim Wallis is currently married to the Democratic power grab.
And so where are we in today's society? How does the world perceive Christians? As those who bring the Good News or those who wag their finger in others' faces? As those who seek to love one another, or as those who protest television shows? As those who seek to save the lost or those who judge the lost for not being responsible?
Love him or hate him, Falwell has left his mark on our American political system. But now, perhaps it is time for evangelicals to reclaim part of what has been lost and proclaim the entire Good News of Jesus Christ rather than just the contemporary partisan political hot-button issues.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Another Grantism
Grant: "I'm hungry."
Jessica: "OK, we are about to eat dinner."
Grant: "But I'm hungry for unhealthy food!"
Jessica: "OK, we are about to eat dinner."
Grant: "But I'm hungry for unhealthy food!"
Claire-ism
Today, Jessica was driving with the kids when a Garbage Truck went by. Claire got really excited and said, "Look Mommy - a trash can bus!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)