I grew up going to church.  In fact, my parents brought me to church the week I was born.  From day one, my parents taught me that God is real, he loves me and has a plan for my life.  At an early age (3), I prayed to ask Jesus into my life.  Did I know the road I would travel or how difficult that life would be? No.  Did I know what I was doing.  Abolutely, YES.

My parents understood what Deuteronomy 6:4 – 9 says.  In a nutshell, it tells parents to live out God’s commands and to impress them on their children.  They had done so well, that I started the conversation with my dad that lead to my prayer.  It was around Christmas and we were looking out our apartment window.  I saw a tree lit up and asked my dad, “Does Jesus live in that tree?”  My dad explained that he didn’t really ‘live’ in the tree, but he lived in mommy and daddy’s hearts and he could live in mine, too.  He asked if I wanted that, I said yes and we prayed together.

A couple years later, somone tried to convince my dad that a child that young could not possibly make a decision like that.  He tested that theory out by asking me if I wanted Jesus to come into my life.  I told him that I had already done that.  Here’s what Jesus said on the subject, “I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” (Mark 10:15)

What do you think Jesus meant by that?  Does that mean you must be completely blind or naive in your faith?

Are you a parent right now?  What are you doing to model a Godly life to your child(ren)?  Are you setting a strong foundation for your children’s faith?  Are you introducing Jesus to your children through your priorities and lifestyle?

I’d love to hear your comments and feedback.  Over this week, I’ll make a few more posts continuing my story.  Hopefully this will give you a bit of insight regarding my perspective on things.  In the three months since my previous post, I’ve written several posts, articles and put together some ideas.  I’ll likely post on a weekly basis, probably on Sunday evenings.

Up next… My Story, part 2… (it won’t be three months away, I promise!)

SIT

This isn’t just something I’m going to quickly “throw together.”  Each post is going to take some time to develop.  I will be taking my time to pray and think about it before putting it out there.

THINK

I believe God has given us brains for a reason, and so I’d like to take this chance to encourage discussion and thoughts on what I post.  There will be many times where I won’t take a stance on a subject in order to foster that discussion.  That’s not to say I don’t have a viewpoint, but you will likely see it come out as part of the discussion, rather than in the postings themselves.

GOOD

I originally came up with this as a not-so-clever play on words with my last name (just as a side note, believe me, I’ve heard them all!).  I want the blog to be good on several levels.  I want it to be positive, engaging, to make people think and to grow people in their quest to know God (or know Him more as the case may be).

BLOG

Well, that’s what it is… and the name doesn’t work without that in the title.

Ground Rules

Finally, some ground rules as it relates to discussion.  While I would encourage various different thoughts and comments, I would ask that people remain respectful.  Keep in mind the “Golden Rule,” to treat others as you would like to be treated.

That’s about it, my next post, “My Story” will be coming shortly…

Stay tuned.

That got me thinking about a similar experience I had watching the men’s gold medal game at the 1994 Olympics.  We were at a youth retreat and there were a pile of guys crowded around a small TV, struggling to get reception to watch the game.  Again, we rode the highs and lows of the game together and it was a fun experience.  As I look back, some of the guys I was with are the same ones I enjoyed the game with last night.

What incredible changes we’ve seen over the past 16 years.  Technology has advanced so much and enabled us to connect with people all over the planet.  The exchange of ideas, the ability to get creative thoughts out and the opportunity to reconnect with old friends is amazing.  I was astounded at how strikingly similar my feelings were last night to those in 1994.  Social networking affords so many opportunites that were absent less than a decade ago.

Social networking also has it’s drawbacks.  We do well to keep them in mind.  I thought of three specifically.  I’m sure there are many more and they are well-documented. 

1. It can consume you.  I don’t think I’m alone in this, but I got nothing else done last night.  I had great plans to get some other work done while watching the game.  I didn’t I was too focussed on all the comments and the fact that I was enjoying the game “with friends.”. Had I planned for this, it would’ve been OK.  Alas, I did not.

2. It cannot replace personal, face-to-face connections.  A recent commercial indicates the places one can “go” with the latest webphones, and it includes getting updates from friends over coffee and, as he sits at the table, friends “appear.”  While this is good and I enjoy doing it myself, we cannot truly know each other through status updates and tweets about our latest feats, meals or stool condition.

3. People feel free to say what they wouldn’t to your face.  I noticed this last night and also in other online reactions that I’ve seen lately.  It is very easy to type something, hit enter and send it out into the world of social networking without giving it a second thought.  I observed this in an online course I took recently, as people said things in an online discussion that they would’t say in a classroom setting.  This can be especially true when something is meant to be humourous, but turns out to be rather biting and sarcastic.  It can change the tone of a conversation pretty quickly. 

This is not intended to be a rant against social networking, but a caution to all who will listen, including me, not to let virtual reality consume you.

Wanna go for coffee?

Stephen Harper alluded to many of these things in his speech tonight.  There are many who say his speech lacked substance – and they would be right – there were no specifics.  He did little to reduce the tone of the rhetoric in parliament.  He was careful to note that they have backed down from the toxic proposals in the economic statement and also noted that his is listening to the opposition parties.  In my opinion, though, he could’ve done more to reach out to them.

Stephane Dion would lead you to believe that the Coalition has a plan in place, but didn’t provide much substance in his speech either.  He actually stated many of the same things the Conservatives are already doing.  He is talking about consultation with industry and the provinces.  He says that they will deliver quickly, but the reality is they need to get their government set up, there will be a Christmas break, and they plan on consultation.  There was nothing said to distinguish his plan from the Conservatives!  Further, if they are ready to govern, why were they so late with the speech?  They were given a window to deliver the tape to the networks, and missed that window.  The tape that aired was late, out-of-focus and amatuer.  Stephane Dion’s speech was nothing more than the title of the book behind him - Hot Air.

Jack Layton gave a wonderful speech – easily the best of the night.  It’s telling that CTV is airing Layton’s clip ahead of Dion’s in their new segments.  His speech was moving, had substance and informed us of a personal meeting between he and Stephen Harper.  He stated that he informed Harper of what he had to do to stimulate the economy on November 12th.  Unfortunately, he isn’t giving the Conservatives the chance to even show if they’ve listened.  He isn’t even waiting for the budget to see whether any of his proposals will be there.  The reality is that he won’t be happy unless a significant chunk of his ideas are implemented.

What the Harper will likely do is request prorogation.  Some may see this as avoidance, and many say that they will be taking the time off.  This is not true.  While, yes they will be avoiding a confidence vote right now, the Conservatives will present a budget right away when they return.  Also, the consultations and meetings should be allowed to carry on throughout the county.  If, when the budget is presented, the Conservatives lose, the GG has her options.

What if the GG tells Stephen Harper to face the vote?  I don’t think the coalition is as iron-clad as they present themselves to be.  The Liberal party has only 77 seats – what if several Liberals realize that many of their constituents do not want this?  Could they abstain or vote against the non-confidence motion?  Would Stephane Dion, with his recently discovered spine, kick them out and risk further damage to him and his party?  What happens to the Liberals if they actually LOSE the vote?  I thnk it’s a distinct possibility, especially after Dion’s video tonight.

What we are really facing now is an informed budget vs. Hot Air

“We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority…”

This was not a coalition being formed to take power, it was a request that the Governor General consult with them before calling an election.  They may have then looked at possibilities to work together for a period of time, although there were no guarantees.  This also would’ve been as a result of a request for dissolution, rather than a power grab.  Yes, they talked with the Bloc, but they did not set up a coalition, depending on their support to pass legislation and to stay in power.

This was not the same thing as the Marriage of Convenience that we saw consumated on December 1st, which was an unabashed power grab.  After Paul Martin’s government fell on the first ever non-confidence vote (Prior governments fell their own legislation), there was an election.  In this circumstance, should the government fall, there should be now, too.

The Liberal and NDP allegations that Conservatives “did the same thing in 2004″ as they are now is revisionism at it’s finest.  There was never a coalition between the Bloc and the Conservatives.

On the other hand, every time the Conservatives and Bloc voted together in prior parliaments, the Liberals and NDP accused them of being a Conservative-Bloc alliance, calling it a terrible thing, bringing up the fact that the Conservatives were dealing with the separitists.  Talk about hypocritical!

It’s time that all the MPs come to their senses and actually govern.  They need to stop the rhetoric and get back to their jobs, bringing forward legislation to help Canadians.

First, my anger is directed towards Steven Harper and Jim Flaherty.  Their proposal last week that funding be cut to the political parties was asinine.  If they really felt that this would help the economy, the Conservatives should have volutarily given up their $10 Million and then recommended that the other parties do the same with their $1.95 per vote.  That way it would not have the effect of mugging the opposition and putting a choke-hold on them.  With the limits placed on donations as a result of the scandals of the past, this is a life-line to all the political parties and they were about to remove this.  How did they think the opposition parties would react?  As Rex Murphy put it last night, Harper is either stupid or arrogant.  Combine this proposal with attempting to restrict the public service’s right to strike for three years and the removal of some of the pay-equity legislation, and it’s little wonder there was a firestorm.  As soon as I heard the news, as a Conservative, I had to shake my head in disgust.

To their credit, the Conservatives backed down on these proposals.  They had been accustomed to a spineless opposition in the Liberals and a helpless opposition in the Bloc and the NDP.  Suddenly, when Stephane Dion finally discovered and inserted his spine (six months before departure), they did the right thing and backed off.

That brings me to Dion and his new partners, Layton and Duceppe.  All three of them were perfectly justified in their anger towards Harper and the government for their approach and arrogance.  But considering the Conservatives backed down when challenged, they should have done the same.  Instead, they plowed ahead with their Marriage – all selling out their principles in some way.

For starters, Jack Layton campaigned continually on reversing the “$50 Billion corporate tax cut.”  This was one of his main campaign sound bites.  Day after day, he focused on the “kitchen table, rather than the boardroom table.”  He wanted to help “ordinary Canadians.”  Suddenly, now that he has the opportunity to sit in government, and in cabinet with 5 other NDP MPs, he decides that he will back down on that.  NDP supporters have said if they’d known he’d do this, they wouldn’t have voted NDP.

Stephane Dion said during the election that he couldn’t form a coalition with the NDP, because their economic policies wouldn’t work.  Six weeks later, a formal coalition is signed.  Stephane Dion also wrote the Clarity Act and has been a staunch federalist.  Yet, he has made a deal with a party whose stated aim is Quebec sovereignty.  Tomorrow, it’s rumoured that Jacques Parizeau will come out supporting the coalition.  Pierre Trudeau is likely rolling over in his grave right now!  Further, he is stepping down as a failed leader, with his dismal election perfomance, and yet he says he has the confidence of the house.  The question really should be, “Does he have the confidence of Canadians?”  How can he possibly become Prime Minister?  We don’t even know who the next leader will be.  Who decides to step up now that they have the opportunity to become Prime Minister?  Do the Liberals continue with their leadership process?

Gilles Duceppe still claims to be a sovereignist and yet has agreed not to bring up the Quebec issue for the 18 months of this agreement.  This is his party’s core value, and yet, he’s abandoned it to support the coalition.  While this one is more understandable, as sovereignty is not on the front-burner, it is still drawing the ire of Bloc supporters, hence the reason for Parizeau’s aforementioned support tomorrow.

What started as a bone-headed move by the Conservatives has turned into an unprecidented fiasco.  Considering the Conservatives pulled their finger away from the trigger, it should’ve all been over.  The three fairweather friends would argue that the Conservatives have presented nothing of substance, but the reality is that should they succeed, the Conservative budget would’ve been introduced before they will be able to bring anything forward.  It’s going to take some time to transition, then there’s the Christmas break, and then they will have to come up with the legislation for their stimulous package.  The fact is, they didn’t even give the Conservatives a chance to present a budget.

Honestly, I hope Harper asks for a prorogue of Parliament, that the Governor General allows it, even as early as it is, and that MPs have the chance to listen to the anger of their constituents.  When they come back in January, the Conservatives should be allowed to at least present a budget, then if they get voted down, the Governor General has her options.

Unfortunately, the Liberal, NDP and Bloc MPs, as elected representatives are within their right to do this, although I believe in the process, they are damaging themselves and the country.  I would hope that should the Governor General grant a prorogation, that MPs do listen to the anger of their constituents.  I also believe that the majority are actually against this coalition, for different reasons.  Obviously, Conservative supporters are, but I believe many Liberals and NDP are too.  By the sounds of things, so are the Bloc.  Hopefully, “cooler heads will prevail” and a tamer, more conciliatory government will move forward with what is best for Canada.

For a minority government to work, concessions do have to be made, but the way that the three party leaders have capitulated on major issues in the name of power is astounding.  Their supporters should be and are outraged.  As noted above, I am a Conservative and I am extremely disappointed in the approach my party has taken.  I was a former PC member, who has stood by, supporting the Conservatives fairly quietly.  I have purchased my membership again, because I support a lot of their policy.  I also purchased my membership to demand better of our politicians, specifically the Conservatives.  As I noted in a previous blog entry, we need to take an active role in holding our politicians accountable.  It’s time that we called on our politicians to stop behaving like they are on the playground and start governing.  For me, this starts by becoming active again at the grassroots level.  It’s the only way we will see change take place.  Whatever party you support, pick up a membership or become active in some other way.  This is the only way we will see change – there is no reason to expect that it can’t happen.  Apathy is not an option.  Let’s take this anger and use it to request better government and more respect.

This marriage of convenience can’t last – hopefully it gets anulled before anyone gets hurt.

Patrick Roy is the reason I’m a Habs fan for life.  When I was younger, I seemed to cheer for goalies and in the ’85 playoffs, Montreal had Steve Penney in net.  I started cheering for them at that time.  The next year, a young goalie named Patrick Roy took over as the number one goalie – and they won the cup.  I became a fan right away.  I enjoyed watching his game and his style.  He helped bring the Habs two cups, winning two Conn Smythe trophies in the process.  Unfortunately, he left under difficult circumstances, but no one can deny what he did for the team.

I enjoyed him when he was in Colorado, too.  One of my favourite lines from him was when he and Jeremy Roenick were trading jabs and he said, “I couldn’t hear him, I had my two Stanley Cup rings in my ears.”  That was awesome!  Sometimes his mouth got him into trouble, but he backed up his comments on the ice and could afford to be cocky as a result.

He pioneered a goaltending style that is prominent in today’s NHL.  I really liked the way the Canadiens honoured that tonight, as they had several children come out wearing the uniforms of so many French-Canadian goaltenders that have followed in his footsteps.  They always do these things well.

Tonight, Patrick Roy alluded to his departure, telling the fans, “I left too early, without saying good-bye.”  Well he had that chance tonight and did it with class.  I don’t think the fans blamed him anyway – I know I didn’t.  Au revoir, Patrick, and merci beaucoup!

Wendel Clark started when the Leafs were terrible.  He played on the “Hound Line” with Gary Leeman and Russ Courtnall.  They made it entertaining for fans that deserved a better product.  He also helped to lead the team back to respectability.  He was hard-nosed, to say the least.  He led by example.  He captured the hearts of Leaf fans and still does today.  That was clear tonight.  Fans were devastated when he was traded away and it took Mats Sundin a long time to come out from under his shadow (and Doug Gilmour’s, too).

Tonight was a great trip down memory lane, as they showed highlights of the 1993 playoffs, when Clark was back with the team.  I wish Toronto had been able to beat LA in their series – they deserved it – and I would’ve loved to see that final!  (Maybe I could’ve worked up a hate for the Leafs that isn’t there – as a Habs fan, I’m not supposed to like them, too – especially living in Ottawa).

Toronto and Montreal both did a tremendous job honouring players that defined their franchises for my generation of fans.  They were very different ceremonies, but both were well-done and fostered great memories.

Congratulations, Patrick and Wendel.  You are both very deserving of the tributes you received tonight.

GO HABS GO!!!

We remember those who died – who paid the ultimate sacrifice.  We remember their families and their pain.  They have sacrificed, too, and suffered great loss.

We remember those who came back, too.  Many with injuries – whether physical, mental or emotional.  The scars do not heal overnight and, in many cases, not at all.

We remember those who are out there now, fighting, doing their duty – for country, for family, for freedom.

Men and women who go to war or serve as peacekeepers deserve our honour, our respect and our thanks.  They put themselves at risk, so that we can be protected.  Their families deserve our support, our compassion and our generosity.

So, for myself and many in my generation, the fortunate ones, who have not had to go to war,  THANK YOU.  We are truly grateful.  Words cannot express how much we appreciate what you have done and continue to do.  WE WILL NEVER FORGET.  You are in our thoughts and prayers every day.

Last summer, I started having some heart palpitations.  This caused some concern and I saw a doctor about it.   There was really nothing too major.  My heart is likely easily over-stimulated and I was consuming copious amounts of coffee, along with dealing with a little more stress than normal.

The battery of tests they ran revealed another problem, though, and I was sent to an internal medicine specialist, whom I saw on October 29, 2007.  He informed me that my LDLs (BAD Cholesterol) were way too high in relation to my HDLs (GOOD Cholesterol).  He told me that if things didn’t change I would need to start taking medication to regulate these levels in the near future.  He told me that I needed to change my diet and increase my exercise level significantly.  At the time, I was pushing 200 Lbs.

I got started right away, literally running on a treadmill (not lasting very long) that night, and continuing daily for a while.  I also changed my diet immediately.  He recommended the G.I. Diet (which I also recommend).  With the help of my wife, I totally change my eating habits overnight.  For the next six months, I followed the diet rigorously.  My weight dropped to 175 Lbs, which for my height, is a little more healthy.

In recent days, I haven’t followed either of these as closely.  Yesterday was a good reminder of the urgent tone that the doctor used when he spoke to me.  I remain about 175 Lbs right, but it’s so easy to over-indulge and to become lazy without thinking twice.  I need to get some blood tests again and hopefully things are moving in the right direction, but I need to re-commit to the diet and exercise as rigorously as I had been.  This is for my own good, for my future, for my family.

I got a wake-up call last October and had a pretty good reminder yesterday.  This was a major one for me, as I know my family has a tendency toward high Cholesterol and blocked arteries.  My mom actually had an angiogram yesterday – thankfully she received good news in that regard.  For me, dealing with this problem now is a key to prevention later on in life.

I think its easy to get careless in life, forgetting to take care of our bodies, our relationships and our spiritual well-being.  Sometimes we need a wake-up call, like I received.  I’m thankful for the heart palpitations I had last summer, because they led me to the change I needed.  Is there a wake-up call needed in your life?  Is there something you need to change?  Choose to do it now, before it becomes a much bigger problem.

That’s all for now… gotta run (not tonight – far too late)

This was a fantastic idea for his campaign and money very well spent.  This was not a cheezy infomercial or an opportunity to pile-on his opponent.  He took the opportunity to present his case to become president.  Whether you agree with him or disagree with him, this was done extraordinarily well, touching on the many issues facing the American public today.  He covered the economy, health care, the war, job security, retirement and education with conviction and clarity.

By speaking with ordinary Americans on each topic and allowing them to share their story, he was able to touch the heart of the average viewer.  He then discussed what he would do that would deal with their issue.  His ideas seem like sensible solutions to significant problems and not left-wing idealism.  His plan includes tax cuts and tax credits, along with specific, targeted cost-cutting and waste-reduction measures.  These actually sound relatively fiscally conservative.  His most significant cost-cutting measure would be, quite obviously, to pull the military out of Iraq – he was pretty clear about that.

The tone of this commercial was the most impressive to me.  There was virtually no negativity (other than one reference to “eight years of failed policies,” alluding to the economy).  It was a positive message, allowing the American public to hear what he would do, rather than talking about what his opponent would do wrong, or comparing his opponent to the current regime.

I would like to see the networks PROVIDE a half-hour time slot to each candidate to do exactly this in the future.  There is no clearer indication of the fundraising gap in this campaign than Obama’s ability to purchase this time slot.  Both parties have been on both sides of the fundraising gap, so this is not an argument that this was unfair.  I believe that the American public would be better served by having the opportunity to watch both candidates share their ideas on the issues, rather than 30-second ads denigrating their opponent and their policies.

For the record, even if it was provided by the networks, I believe that this would still play into Obama’s hands, as he is the far more charismatic, effective and convincing speaker.

That’s all for now… watching as an interested observer in six days!