A recent survey in the US asked;

“Do you think an elected official who commits an immoral act in their private life can still behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public and professional life?”

http://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2016/10/19/has-trump-caused-white-evangelicals-to-change-their-tune-on-morality/

The numbers who thought a politician could perform ethically in their public duties despite their acting immoral in their private life jumped from 44% in 2011 to 66% now.

Democrats went from 49 to 61% and Republicans from 36 to 70%. But interestingly, rather than political persuasion, it was religious affiliation that featured as the biggest factor.

While religiously non-aligned dropped from 63% to 60 Catholics increased from 42 to 58% and mainstream Protestants from 38 to 60%.

But it was white evangelicals who saw the biggest increase, from 30 to 72%.

Anyone who decides to stand for election, thus live off stolen tax-payer's money, has already behaved unethically in their private life!

Can they still behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public and professional life?

Theoretically possible, but most improbable.

Well, strike me lucky, SR has started a thread!

Social psychologists were strongly involved in Obama's campaign. There are, I believe, ethical concerns there, especially for the voters manipulated by the powerful techniques.

Without bothering too much with SR's recommended reading for OLO members, the first consideration for prospective readers should be to put on their thinking caps and to power up their Bull*bleep* detectors.

First things first though, Western thinking is strongly rooted in character and personality, to make very unreliable assumptions about behaviour. In different situations and remembering that situations vary enormously, all of us, WE too, act differently and our behaviour cannot be forecast or anything of value learned from it that might be applied usefully and reliably later.

Forget the article and wait for the criticisms of social psychology Profs who are involved in recent research. That is if they even bother to respond to it.

Just to further enlighten people the Brookings Institute which conducted this survey is a one hundred year old institution, highly regarded and often ranked first in the world for its accuracy and it ability to influence policy.

http://ceoworld.biz/2017/01/31/100-influential-think-tanks-world-2017/

 “Brookings and its researchers are not so concerned, in their work, in affecting the ideological direction of the nation” and rather tend “to be staffed by researchers with strong academic credentials”.
Wikipedia

To try and debase the work of such an august institution speaks to a toxic ideological mindset indicative of those who flippantly dismiss academic rigour because it threatens their politics.

They really need to grow up.

I am interested to hear runner's take though. Here is someone who has in the past been so quick to pick the moral faults of all and sundry but has become one of Trump's biggest supporters on OLO. I would love to know the mental gymnastics that would have entailed.

Again, wait for the social psychologists folks. If it is worth anything they will be commenting. But I will venture right now that unreliable fluff like that article is entertainment and a waste of precious life time. There is so much of it about too.

It seems I have been given a further opportunity to expand on the veracity of the article.

Here is a little about the author.

“William A. Galston holds the Ezra K. Zilkha Chair in the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program, where he serves as a senior fellow.”

“His current research focuses on designing a new social contract and the implications of political polarization.”

“He is also College Park Professor at the University of Maryland.  Prior to January 2006, he was Saul Stern Professor and Acting Dean at the School of Public Policy, University of Maryland, director of the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, founding director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), and executive director of the National Commission on Civic Renewal, co-chaired by William Bennett and Sam Nunn.”

“Galston is the author of eight books and more than 100 articles in the fields of political theory, public policy, and American politics.  His most recent books are Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge, 2002), The Practice of Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge, 2004), and Public Matters (Rowman & Littlefield, 2005).  A winner of the American Political Science Association’s Hubert H. Humphrey Award, he was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2004.”

Hardly a hack journalist writing a clickbait article.

There are of course some who will try and dismiss anything that challenges their mindset as 'fake news' or 'puff pieces', even something with as much weight as this piece. It really does show how blighted and shallow their perspectives are.

Less disturbing than sad.

This article is total rubbish do you even know who the Brookings Institute are and the things they advocate?
Look up 'The Push to Persia', these are the people advocating for wars for Israel and American exceptionalism and even advocate a false flag terrorist attack on US shores blamed on Iran as a pretext to start war.

I'll tell you why this article is total garbage.
Point 1. It assumes that evangelicals believe that the Christopher Steel (PP) dosier / Russian narrative is true, which it is not.
Why dont you get your facts straight and look up Fusion GPS?
Do you not think evangelicals havent looked into it and doubt the story?
Point 2. Evangelicals know that Trump, like them is not perfect and they see him as a far better candidate and doing things more in their interests than Hillary Clinton or Democrats.
Supporting Trump over Clinton does not in any way challenge their religious views.

Finally you want a real story?
This is a story so big it's not just a real story but THE story.
It involves Clintons, the DNC and their IT professionals the Awan Brothers, but that is just the tip of the iceberg.
It's not easy to introduce you to this story because it's like 100 stories or individual investigations all connected and all into one.
The following article does not do it justice just how big this story is.
http://www.trunews.com/article/could-the-awan-schultz-scandal-bring-down-the-democratic-party

You can find out more here:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/25/wasserman-shultzs-it-aide-arrested-trying-to-flee-the-country/
And also on the Youtube Channels 'George Webb' and 'Crowdsource the Truth' and on their website
http://truthleaks.org

Trump Fights Back.
http://www.trunews.com/article/house-asks-for-special-investigator-for-clinton-comey-lynch

The last thing I want to say is that 90% of the news you guys read is propaganda, based on narrative and conjecture to sell less informed individuals a ratings-based story.

Too often commenters quote people, organisations and NGO's they know little about.

Knows squat about social psychology is that what you are saying?

BTW, no-one is casting aspersions on 'veracity', that is you. However, do you call a plumber for your electrical?

Dear SteeleRedux,

Thank You for the link from Brookings. I am familiar
with their work and their reputation -
having worked at the Reference Department
of the University Library, at the University of Southern
California for many years. The Brookings Institution
is a nonprofit organisation engaged in nonpartisan study
of economic, governmental, and international issues and the
social sciences. Its purpose is to contribute to the
understanding of important problems in public policy. It
was founded in 1927 and its headquarters are in Washington,
D.C.

It is interesting indeed that White Evangelicals have
changed their opinions regarding morality and ethics.
I imagine that this change would not have occurred
under Bill Clinton or Hillary. They would be
considered too "Progressive." And Bill Clinton I'm sure
would have been condemned for his"scandalous" behaviour
by them.

However let us not forget
that those who voted for Donald Trump live predominantly
in the Mid-West - are White Evangelicals - and simply
look upon Trump as the man who's going to "Make America
Great Again." They want to bring back the so called
"glory" days of old. They're therefore willing to
forgive Trump everything. Until of course he stops delivering
on what he's promised them. Then it will become interesting
to see just how things will change.

Armchair Critic,

Our posts crossed. As you would appreciate, my post above was directed at SteelRedux.

of course personal morals or lack of define public performance and policy.Look at some of the deviants who designed ' safe' schools. In Canada one is in prison for child abuse.

Dear Foxy,

Yes it is interesting. I find it fascinating especially having Christian fundamentalist in-laws some of whom while being ardent Trumps supporters obviously do not live in mid-west USA.

So at least in an Australian context I am placing his support in the anti-Muslim court although I suspect this holds to a large degree in the US as well.

I recently challenged two of those in-laws on what Trump had done to improve things in the US managing to counter each one with facts until we got to the Muslim issue. His attempt to ban Muslims from certain countries was enthusiastically touted. Then one raised an point I had never heard before, that Trump had stopped Muslim prayer times in the White House which had brought proceedings to a halt 5 times a day amongst other similar transgressions. They were all bunkum of course.
http://www.snopes.com/trump-cancels-obamas-muslim-ritual/

Any open reader of the Old Testament is usually struck by how flawed the biblical characters are. There is probably a case to be made by them that Trump is also a vehicle for God's work although evangelists are normally most insistent that biblical figures like Abraham are extremely pious and God fearing.

Unfortunately it just seems on a very base level this is a case of modifying your ethics to embrace a man who you deem to be an enemy of your enemy. Hardly a 'Christian' stance.

I would love further elaboration from runner but I don't think we are going to get it. Pity.

Ok here's another one.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/05/the-brookings-institute-plan-to-liquidate-syria/

Why here wants to argue the fact that the US has lost another war, and destroyed an ENTIRE NATION for nothing?

If you think this is good, what with the increased refugees from that area of the world and threat to our nation from all these wars you need your head examined.

You want to call me names and insult me before I even respond SR?
What is wrong with you people (not you leoj)
You proclaim to know-it-all?
Well you're just another uninformed idiot that's too lazy to look up facts.

Non Profit / Non Partisan Foxy?
Just like GetUp! I suppose you're dumb enough to buy into them being non-partisan or unbiased and non political little halo wearers as well?

The only thing non-partisan here that matters is that both Democrats and Republicans support the wars, not least because they're all invested in military contractors; not to mention the corruption and blackmail.
Maybe you should look at things they vote for and against.
Also the MSM is complicit in supporting these wars and attempting to put Hillary in the Whitehouse.
They're complicit in the lies and they're going to keep lying and trying to keep up their abysmal ratings with sensationalised narratives based on absolutely nothing.

Blow by blow accounts of Trumpmania are now very, very boring. We have enough going on in our own political swamp to keep us occupied. What goes on in U.S domestic politics should not be our concern. U.S foreign policy and how that affects us is the only thing that counts.

How strange...
Posts an article questioning evalgelicals support of Trump
Then posts another article which explains it.

Trump said he supported Christian ideals during his campaign, Hillary supported illegals, progressives and the pro-gay community.
What the hell are we even talking about, it's all crap if you're dumb enough to buy into it.
This is all just conjecture to undermine Trump.

Why won't you look at facts?
The answer is people are more interested in sensationalised narratives than the facts, the truth is you're all idiots, no offense.

Then you post a snopes link, go look up forbes article 'Snopes Fact Checking the Fact Checkers'.
The simple fact is we don't know the bias of the people employed there.

Dear Armchair Critic,

We actually can get the bias of the sources we use
if we bother to check them out. For example -
I checked on your sources - TruNews, Daily Caller,
truthleaks, and CounterPunch.

Here's a link just on one of your sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CounterPunch

And compare yours with the Brookings Institution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution

Enough said.

No you're wrong ttbn,
The stuff going on in US domestic politics is the only story..
-Or more to the point what is going on behind the scenes.
There's a battle going on to once and for all expose the Clinton machine and bring all that has been going for the last 30yrs out into the open, and it all depends on how it plays out.

If I was to push a story (one of the many hundreds connected in with above), it would be that the Russia narrative is crap.
It was never Russian hacking, it was DNC leaks.
That Hillary is guilty of doing EVERYTHING she accuses others of, she learned this from Saul Ilinsky 'Rules for Radicals'
The big story is that Obama, Hillary and Soros colluded to overthrow the Ukrainian government and meddle in their election, you can listen to Victoria Nuland virtually choosing the government of Ukraine in leaked calls, all this can be proven.
This would call into question Soros use of Open Society groups, and lead to having them banned.

Trump, Clinton and Obama are humans which means they have a corrupt nature just like everyone on this blog. Bush was also supported by evangelicals even though he like Clinton and Obama sold out to the Saudis. At the end of the day they are puppets. If you measure corruption, probably the worst would come from the left wing media who are totally incapable of reporting outside their very warped and often perverted and incorrect narrative. The abc's reporting or lack of on matters like 'gay' marriage, Islam and Israel are prime examples. Trump with all his failures is far more likely to call out truth than the likes of Clinton and Obama. At the end of the day it is my opinion (not necessarily shared by other believers) that Trump is miles ahead of Clinton/Obama in terms of character and policy. I suspect that evangelicals would of much preferred Ben Carson as President.

Two old timers spring to light:
John F Kennedy and
Bill Clinton.

Dear SteeleRedux,

I agree that white Evangelicals in the US will forgive
Donald Trump almost everything because he is so
anti-Muslim. Part of their beliefs is that they think
that Trump is acting rationally.

Have you heard of the Christian "end-timers?"

The US is full of these.

I'm so glad that we left that country to come back
home.

But lo and behold - look what I've found on this
forum... who would have thought.

No you're full of crap Foxy, (no offense)
Instead of challenging my sources (in which case my sources are the actual investigative journalists that have been uncovering the story for the last 290 days non-stop every day on youtube) why don't you argue the facts?

Instead of arguing because I've said something that got your nose out of joint.

Are you saying that the Brookings Institude did not produce a publication advocating for false flag attacks on US soil to start a war with Iran called 'Which Path to Persia'
Are you saying they also did not also advocate a war in Syria, presumable as a stepping stone to war with Iran?
Have you actually seen the video by General Wesley Clark directly after 911 with plan to take down 7 countries in 5 years, including Iran?
Look it up.

I have the internet and I know how to use it.
Obviously you don't.

Maybe you're all upset with the things I say, but that doesn't mean it's not true. The time you waste arguing you could look the stuff up yourselves or argue over something you actually know about.

Yeah Foxy, try applying the same narratives for regressives

I agree that blacks and feminist in the US will forgive
Obama almost everything because he is so
anti-Christian. Part of their beliefs is that they think
that Obama is acting rationally.

You are a prime example of someone whose narrative is so predictive. Yes Christians have a variety of beliefs about end times however most are not nearly as wackie as those who are in plain denial when it comes to Islam.

Dear Armchair Critic,

So you think that CounterPunch and TruNews are
investigative and reputable news sources and
the Brookings Institution is crap?

In that case there's nothing more to be said.
I would be wasting my time trying to argue
with either your logic or your "facts."

Dear runner,

Tor Hundloe in his book, "From Buddha to Bono: Seeking
Sustainability," points out that -

One of the saving graces of the Cold War was that
it was conducted by somewhat rational people in Washington
and Moscow. Christian fundamentalists did not gain control
of the White House during the Cold War, and the Soviets
for all their wrongdoings believed in heaven on earth
(pure communism) because that was all there ever could be
in their atheistic world. There is no greater reason
for living the good life, which requires seeking the good
life for one's fellows, than accepting that this one is
the only one we have.

It is in this context of religious fatalism that we can
understand suicide bombers. They think they are acting
rationally according to their beliefs. So are the
Christian "end timers," who would bring an Armageddon today
if they could.

An end-timer is someone who believes the end of time is near -
there will be a great battle - the battle of Armageddon in
Israel - and the Messiah will return to earth and govern
for 1000 years, and all the world's Jews will be destroyed
if they don't convert to Christianity.

Ironically, the Jews are needed to fulfil this Old
Testament prophecy, as they have to conquer all the so-called
"Biblical Lands" before Armageddon is possible.

This helps explain the unholy alliance between American
end-timers and Jewish fundamentalists.

So much for this inelegant indulgence with the sad-state of
the world today.

If you want to pursue the matter in a concise (absolutely
brilliant) book, there is Sam Harris' (2006) "Letter to a
Christian Nation" - a letter to believers in the US.

SR,

Irrespective of the author's credentials, the moment one says "I can think of only one credible answer" then I believe the person hasn't been thinking very hard.

While Trump may be a big factor, the erosion in the belief of those purporting to be moral is a large factor too, for example, the Catholic Church, and the relative non-performance of Obama.

While I'm not a fan of Trump, I believe much of his success was because he wasn't Hilary.

Hi Foxy,

No, those links, firstly trunews.com was a site I only found yeaterday, and it did seem a little religious but they have a write up (which I shared) which is a fairly good breakdown of some of the things going on with the story about the Awan brothers, which will be the biggest scandal in history, when the media catches up, and it is slowly building.

I wouldn't have to post obscure links to media if the corporate media did it's job.

The story is so big and involved the media don't yet know what to do with it, because they gave up investigative journalism years ago.

The counterpunch article was one I found in 2 mins then posted here to futher argue that the Brookings Institute is not a good organisation.
William Galstom is just another warmongering neocon...
What else is there to know?

If I was working from my computer and not from the xbox I'd be able do dig up alot more stuff, but right now I can't even open a .pdf or copy and paste.

The only story that matters in the world right now is the Awan Brothers scandal, don't say you haven't been informed, the person who has been researching it is George Webb on youtube other journalists such has Luke Rosiak of the Daily Caller have picked up on the story and its just starting to force its way into the mainstream media.

I've been following this story for months, and I've been ahead of the news, I've known things that were going to happen ahead of time and before the media reports on it.

Dear Shadow Minister,

It's true that Hilary Clinton did not bother to even visit
some states to campaign - so certain was she of
succeeding to the White House that she took so
much for granted much to her detriment. However
you have not addressed the question in this discussion
as to WHY white Evangelicals support Donald Trump NOW?
Why are they being so lax as far as judging his
behaviour (past and present) and letting him get away
with what would have been totally unacceptable from any other
American President?

come on Foxy
' This helps explain the unholy alliance between American
end-timers and Jewish fundamentalists'

don't think it just might be one democracy which is very civilised against another people group who know not more than hatred.

As for Sam Harris. What man with any brains could argue that science can determine right and wrong. He is one deluded cookie. Obviously any honest biologist will tell you the risks of sodomy. He is a self appointed neuro scientist with a huge ego and little to back it up.

By the way, I'm not one of those Christians who see's the world through Jewish coloured glasses, in case you're wondering or implying something.
I'm not a Christian Fundamentalist.
Let's support Neocons like Galstrom and try to push the 'Greater Israel' project hey?
You're the one who is falling for it Foxy.
Israel can't start that big war as the aggressor, why do you think it benefitted them to have Syria turned over to Jihadists?
Why do you think Pro-Jewish neocons advocate for these Middle Eastern wars?
Have you heard of the paper 'Zionist Plan for the Middle East'?
There's also another paper from Project for the New American Century that outlines a 'new 911' to start the war on terror.
'America's Stretegic something.... Can't remember of hand and I can't change the page to check without losing what I wrote.
My dad is a Christian and religious, and recently posted on facebook a meme supportive of Netanyahu on facebook.
I said 'Why would you support Israel when they support the rebels and the killing of Christians in Syria?'
I'm yet to get a reply...

Have you heard of the town Maloula, in Syria?
If not look it up and check news.

How do you think US evalgelical taxpayers feel about funding the killing of Christians?

Give me facts, not narrative, assumptions and conjecture.

From ft.com
'Syrian Rebels Alarmed Covert CIA Support Will End'
'One rebel commander who asked not to be named said US support has been waning for months, but noted that the rebels have been given their salaries as normal last month.'

Not just arming them (with Black Weapons Sarin, Depleted Uranium and White Phosphorus) coming out of Bulgaria on Silkway Airlines under diplomatic cover, and being delivered to Incirlik airbase Turkey but paying their salaries as well.

Look up Dilyana Gaytandzhieva if you want the story about weapons moved on civilian aircraft under diplomatic cover.

How many people still want to argue that Syria is a civil war?

Dear SM,

An erosion of belief to account for a 42% shift in white evangelicals over a period of 5 years?

I thought you were going to provide an alternative 'credible' answer. This was not it. Care to try again?

It is already happening isn't it ?
I haven't used the msm for years as they are all just propaganda.

SR,

Please read my posts before issuing a half arsed response.

I never claimed that there was an alternative, just that the claim that is was only one factor was implausible given the significant changes in societal values over the last 6 years (2017-2011=6 of which Trump has only really affected the last year or so). And the resulting backlash.

The recent rise of identity politics and the "thought police" to punish those that dissented has attempted to redefine morality, and for many such, as the white evangelicals it probably came down to a choice of the lesser evil. The arrow of causality might point to Trump being elected because of the change in values rather than vice versa.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Half arsed? Hell mate, at least I went and checked the date of the surveys before posting the figure of 5 years.

And I have looked at your posts but you seemed not to have looked at the article with any detail at all otherwise you wouldn't be attributing anything of significance to societal changes.

To have the Republicans outstrip the Democrats, and the White Evangelicals outstrip all other denominations after significantly trailing them means common sense surely dictates the only significant factor as being Trump.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/

Further the religiously non-aligned figure can be justifiably used as a base line figure for societal changes and it was relatively steady.

Look I understand you get off on being a contrarian but at least do us the courtesy of backing it up with something of substance.

Trump holds bible studes in the Whitehouse.
Obama's Whitehouse stopped 5 times a day for the Koran.
Trump said 'God Bless America' all the time, and campained for their votes, Hillary only started saying it when she had when she knew the numbers werent good.
Hillary was after the immigrant / gay / progressive / younger vote.
What the hell is this thread about?
What are you trying to say?
And your using stats that were from CNN Fake news.
No wonder you're confused

Dear SteeleRedux,

I've just come across a very interesting link that
explains why conservative Evangelicals have lined
up behind Trump.

It's written by Dr Molly Worthen,
who's a historian of American religion. She graduated
from Yale in 2003 and earned a PhD in American
Religious History in 2011. She's Assistant Professor
of History at the University of North Carolina (Chapel
Hill). Her most recent book,"Apostles of Reason," is
the History of American Evangelicals since 1945.
What she says makes perfect sense.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/05/a-match-made-in-heaven/521409/

Dear Foxy,

Thank you for the link

Some of it I think is overworked purely because I don't sense there was much historical thinking that went into gut reactions of Trump supporters but I do think the Prosperity Gospel linkages certainly had merit.

Dear Armchair Critic,

I'm wondering if you are able to take the time to be a little more coherent in your posts. Making solid points backed by evidence might be a start.

For instance, where pray tell did you get the notion that the Obama White House stopped 5 times a day for Muslim prayers? Perhaps if we concentrate on teasing this point out before we address other things might be a process we can both get something from.

Foxy,

Thanks for your link, to some extent it says what I was saying previously on the issue. The moves by the political elite to mainstream political ideologies that vast differ from those of the evangelicals and the PC culture that punishes those that dissent has created huge resentment, that no one from the mainstream democratic or republican parties were prepared to address. That the Trump campaign picked this up and trashed the PC culture is what endeared these people to him, that he was deeply morally deficient was less of a handicap than the toxic more of the same Hillary campaign.

SR,

In my experience sense is seldom common, and having worked with statistics, the mantra that correlation does not imply causality is a common mistake and leaping to the seemingly most obvious answer and declaring it the only answer lacks not only imagination but reason. This poll does not cover itself in glory showing Clinton / Trump at 51% to 36% with Clinton having 141% of the votes that Trump had only 3 weeks from elections. It would appear that some interviewees for the poll were not telling the truth or they were interviewing the wrong people.

When visiting an actuary friend of mine in California in 2007, the topic of Bush and his likely successor came up. My thoughts were that Hillary Clinton would most likely be the next president. My friend just laughed and said that she carried far too much baggage but in 2008 the inexperienced newcomer Obama came from far behind and beat her convincingly. Similarly, in 2016 I thought that there was little chance that Clinton would lose, and yet here we are, with clearly the obvious failing to happen.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Hilary Clinton did carry a great deal of baggage.
And she took a lot for granted - which was a mistake.
However she did gain more popular votes than Trump.
He won on an electoral system that badly needs fixing.
How can someone be elected to the American Presidency
by states with smaller populations. The electorate
system is about 100 years old. When most of the
population was on the East Coast. Today, population
on the West Coast has hugely increased - and yet
they still have the old electoral vote allocation.

Anyway, I suppose that people will learn to get up of
their backsides next time around and vote or the nation
has to make it compulsory voting as is the case here.

It will be interesting to see how long Trump lasts and
whether he will see out his full time. If he does will
he get another term?

People who voted for him believed what he promised and
said but even today we hear on the news that Trump is
a prolific liar, and he just doesn't seem to care.
He can only fool some of the people some of the time
but as the saying goes he can't fool all of them all
of the time. Although this is America - and anything is
possible. What gives me hope is that his approval
rating is about 23 per cent and disapproval rating is
63 per cent. Of course there are people who simply don't
care.

Foxy,

Donald Trump is a troll and a generally despicable person. I don't admire him, but he did spot a great under-swell of feeling against the sanitized political elite on both sides and exploited it ruthlessly.

Trump, Corbyn and Sanders are all symptoms of the frustration with the sanitized political elite and are all pedalling populist and dangerous policies.

I don't disagree with much of SR's original post, and as an atheist, I don't have any particular skin in the game. However, being the contrarian that I am I find it grating when commentators take a bunch of stats and in a eureka moment discover "the root cause" that confirms their pre-conceived ideas.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Thanks for explaining.

Who knows what on earth is going to happen in the
US politically. With Trump - expect the unexpected.

My son just gave me the book "Rising Star: The Making
of Barack Obama," by David J. Garrow. It covers Obama's
life before he became President. The book is 1078 pages
long (not counting all the acknowledgements and notes
at the end). So it's going to be quite a challenge to
read. Also the print is quite small. But it was a
Birthday present - so I'll have to rise to the
challenge. I've got another book on order from a nearby
book-shop, "Flying Without A Net," by Vital Germaine.
It's about an artist who worked for Cirque du Soleil
and then had an accident. How he survived and turned
his life around should make for a good read.

At the moment, I need a bit of a "pick-me-up."