- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostReal Guilt and Sinfulness
- Next Post »When Helping Hurts
A La Carte (3/9)
- 03/09/10
- 7
Inside the World of Obama’s Secret Service - “In the 13 months that Barack Obama has been the occupant of the Oval Office he has been the subject of an extraordinary outpouring of emotion from the American electorate. At the start it was largely adulatory, though more recently the adoration has been drowned out by a cacophony of criticism from tea party activists, birthers, global-warming deniers and viewers of Fox News. At the same time, largely hidden from view, there has been a layer of antagonism towards Obama that lies well beyond the boundaries of reasonable political debate.”
The More You Multitask - Matt Perman discusses the perils of multitasking. “Multitasking, in short, is not only not thinking, it impairs your ability to think. Thinking means concentrating on one thing long enough to develop an idea about it.”
Grant Repentance -This week in Monday with Mounce, Bill Mounce looks at 2 Timothy 2:25. “Paul tells Timothy that he must stay away from senseless controversies, not be quarrelsome but rather kind, patiently enduring evil. Paul is thinking specifically of how Timothy should deal with the false teachers at Ephesus, men that I have argued in my commentary are the Ephesian church leadership.”
Canada Loves Hockey - I got a laugh out of this, a chart tracking water consumption during the gold medal hockey game.
Pillar Commentary Sale
This is the last day you can take advantage of Westminster Books’ sale on the excellent Pillar Commentary series (edited by D.A. Carson). They have the brand new Hebrews volume in stock. Buy two of the commentaries and you’ll get a further 10% off any others you buy. This is a good time to stock up on the series while it is still young and you don’t have too many volumes to catch up with.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (7)
Hey Tim why have you removed the link to http://www.discerningreader.com I noticed it has gone now that you have this new design?
Wow. I’m not an Obama supporter by any stretch of the imagination, but that Secret Service article made my blood boil.
Just a word of caution, the Southern Poverty Law Center isn’t exactly known for their credibility.
Grant - Good question. I just forgot about the link to DR. I need to restore that.
FYI, it looks like the Pillar sale has been lengthened to last another week…
Well, if the public knows how to express a level of animosity toward the President that goes beyond political disagreement, did they not learn it from about 2004-2009? Is this a new thing in the case of President Obama, or the continuation of same song, different players?
Yes, that’s the easy party-line response. Is it somehow wrong?
I’m not special, I don’t know you, and other than being your brother in Christ and Canadian, we’re not related at all, as far as I know. I say this, because I’m about to state an opinion, but I’m not asking for special treatment. My opinion is my own. Others may share it, they may not.
Enough for the disclaimer. When you write your descriptions for stuff, I like having a summary of the articles you link to, not just the capturing statement (or whatever the technical term is for the sentence or paragraph that’s supposed to capture an audience’s attention).
For example, you linked to that article about President Obama’s Secret Service. The last sentence of the quote you posted was, “At the same time, largely hidden from view, there has been a layer of antagonism towards Obama that lies well beyond the boundaries of reasonable political debate.”
I appreciate summaries because I can then decide whether it is something I’m going to find interesting or not. Specifically, to relate it back to the article, if you had said, “It’s really bad,” I would have read the article without hesitation. (And having now read Barry Wallace’s comment, I will read it.) But sometimes I find that those sorts of leads in (or is the plural of “lead in” lead ins?) can exaggerate. And what seems bad to the reporter, is mild compared to what I, a Canadian ruined by movies filled with extraordinarily unrealistic events, expect. That is to say, I find it boring.
Thus, my request is that you put a line of explanation of why you’re suggesting the article (e.g., “This article gives a glimpse into the sorts of threats that Mr. Obama faces,” or “There are some crazy people out there. I can’t believe these things the Secret Service is protecting the president from”), or a summary (I’d offer a suggestion but I haven’t read the article yet, but I’m sure you get the idea).
I put the disclaimer at the top because I’m being critical, but I don’t want to sound demanding. Especially since some people like surprises. I’m not too big a fan of surprises, hence my request.
Despite giving this criticism, I’m really grateful for la carte, and your blog more generally. Keep up the good work, either way.
Sorry for the long comment,Peter Eddy
I felt sad that the article on the president assumed that many things happening in the US are because of his race. This does NOT take into account the facts of what is happening…..the headlong plunge into radical debt, and the total disregard for the constitution.