Wednesday, May 28, 2008
It's been 19 years since Indiana Jones donned his weather beaten fedora and now he is back for another adventure! But was it worth the $8.00 ticket price? My answer is YES!
I was lucky to have enough gas to make it to the theater to see the new Indiana Jones movie. First I would like to say that I am a huge Indiana Jones fan. I grew up watching them with my dad, so they have a special place in my heart. When I first heard they were going to make another Indiana Jones movie, I was excited! But! I didn't have high expectations for this movie like a lot of people did which they ended up coming out of the theater disappointed. I didn't have high expectations for this movie because there is no way you can beat the original movies! You just can't. Therefore you can't have high expectations. Same goes for the new star wars movies. I didn't have high expectations because you can't beat the old ones. Not to say the new ones are not good because they are. They are just not as good as the originals.
Without giving to much away Indy4 begins with The old school looking paramount logo! note: By then I was drooling! Then it cuts to very basic text like the old movies which was awesome! The camera follows these group of teenagers in a 0ld fashioned car flying down the desert goofing off with Elvis's You ain't nothing but a hound dog blazing in the background! By then I had a big smile on my face because I am glade that they gave this movie the old school feel that the other movies had.
I also love how they introduce Dr. Jones! A convoy of KGB vehicles breaks into Area 51. You find that they have Dr. Indy held captive in a car. They toss him out of the car but the only thing you see is his fedora in the dirt. You see Indy's shadow rise up, and grab the fedora slowly. Thats when the very familiar John Williams score starts when he puts the fedora on! I was hooked and felt like a kid again. Then from there we are thrown into a huge action scene when Dr. Jones is suppose to find this mysterious skull in a hanger full of boxes similar to the last scene of Raiders of the Lost Ark. By then you know what the skull is! Big hint they are in area 51! The beginning of the movie continues from one action scene to another ending with Indy surviving a nuclear blast! Some felt it was to over the top! Which yes it was but it was over the top Indy style and it showed that Indy was still the man!
The middle is alright, not as much action, it spends time going more in depth with the story. The last half had a lot of action. an amazing chase through the jungle, but it had to much special effects for a Indy Film in my opinion. The last few scenes were so, so, It's a Indy movie. Every Indy movie had the same kind of conclusion dealing with the villains.
Character wise Shia Labeof was really good at playing the greaser Mutt. Karen Allen was good returning as Marion even though she wasn't in the movie till the last half. Kate Blanchett was alright at playing the villian. Not the best villain in the Indy series. And of course Harrison Ford is the Man! I forgot he was in his 60's as I was watching this movie.
The Good: The Acting, the Action, the nuclear bomb effect was awesome! And The story
The Bad: Even though the story is good I think they could have picked a better artifact to go with in the world of Archeology. But I guess old George Lucas has to get his say so in. Oh and the movie had to many special effects!
The Ugly: The Special effects were so, so. But I think they purposly went that way. I remember reading a article were Speilburg wanted to make the effects not as great to give it the feel of the original movies. Um lets see, Oh Yah! Mutt swinging with the monkeys was soooo laughable. It was what I call a Jar Jar binks moment. And lastly it felt as if Speilburg wrote three fourths of the movie and George freaking Lucas came in and added his idea to the second to the last scene.
Over All: It was a good action packed movie worth the money. It's not an Oscar winner or the second coming like a lot of people thought! But come on everyone! It was an Indiana Jones film! Cheesy unrealistic action+funny characters+an okay plot+Harrison Ford = Indiana Jones! And thats what Indiana Jones is. It was good! It Just wasn't as good as the original ones. But thats okay because I didn't think it would be.
Overall Rating: 8 out of 10
Monday, May 26, 2008
For many Americans, Memorial Day marks little more than the start of summer. It's a day off going to the pool or grill in the back yard. But it's no holiday for America's best. Memorial Day will find our troops fighting terrorists and other enemies of freedom around the globe. For their sake, let's ponder what this holiday really means.
I recently spent some time on this website footnote.com were you can view a Interactive Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Which was amazing to me. I never been able to make it to Washington D.C. to view this memorial, I never knew the large scale of deaths until I checked out this interactive website.
Those simple grave markers tell great stories. Representing those who served bravely, brave heroes who had families and never made it back to see them. They made the ultimate sacrifice so that the rest of us could live in freedom and prosperity.
Still others memorialize those who died in the conflict that created Arlington and so many other national cemeteries. Their service in our Civil War helped end slavery, allowing even those who came here in chains to experience freedom.
Memorial Day is also a time to celebrate the living, those Americans who voluntarily wear our country's uniform and fight for liberty. It's worth remembering that every person who has enlisted since late 2001 has done so knowing we're at war, and understanding combat experience is likely.
It's amazing that such a small group of people are able to accomplish so much. Less than 1% of our country's population serves in the military, yet the U.S. has power worldwide.
So what do we owe these brave volunteers, other than our respect and gratitude? Mainly, to give them what they deserve: the tools to win. That means spending what's necessary for new weapons systems, including aircraft carriers and fighter jets. That's not too much to ask of a nation as wealthy as ours.
Today the United States spends much more on leisure pursuits than on national defense. Every year Americans shell out $589 billion on entertainment and dining out, and $543 billion on leisure travel. Meanwhile, our government invests $537 billion on national defense. As a percentage of our gross domestic product (about 4 percent today), that's far less than we've spent in past wars.
As Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned shortly after assuming his post last year, "I think as a country we're just going to have to devote more resources to national security in the world that we're living in right now." That's worth remembering this weekend.
For generations our country has fielded an elite fighting force, as Kaiser Wilhelm II, Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein learned the hard way. That's certainly true today. "Wartime U.S. military enlistees are better educated, wealthier and more rural on average than their civilian peers," Mr. Kane discovered.
Today let's honor these patriots. Thank them for their service. Because of them, the United States faces a bright future of freedom and prosperity.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Saturday, May 24, 2008
In a grilling of oil executives by a House panel yesterday, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., threatened to nationalize the industry if it didn't do something about the rising prices at the pump.
A report by Fox News, captured in a clip posted on YouTube.com, showed Waters challenging the president of Shell Oil, John Hofmeister, to guarantee the prices consumers pay will go down if the oil companies are allowed to drill wherever they want off of U.S. shores.
Hofmeister replied: "I can guarantee to the American people, because of the inaction of the United States Congress, ever-increasing prices unless the demand comes down."
The Shell exec said paying $5 at the pump "will look like a very low price in the years to come if we are prohibited from finding new reserves, new opportunities to increase supplies."Waters responded, in part, "And guess what this liberal would be all about. This liberal will be about socializing … uh, um. …"
The congresswoman paused to collect her thoughts.
"Would be about, basically, taking over, and the government running all of your companies. …"
The oil executives responded, according to Fox News, by saying they've seen this before, in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. - www.Worldnetdaily.com
Hahaha! The cats out of the bag! the liberals want to Socialize everything! Letting the government take over. As if we didn't already know that. But a liberal finally had the guts to come out and say it in public.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — The 5-year-old daughter of contemporary Christian music star Steven Curtis Chapman was struck and killed Wednesday by a sport utility vehicle driven by her brother, authorities said.
The girl, Maria, was hit in a driveway on the family residence Wednesday afternoon by a Toyota Land Cruiser driven by her teenage brother, said Laura McPherson, a spokesman for the Tennessee Highway Patrol.
McPherson said no charges are expected.
"It looks like a tragic accident," she said.
She said several members of the Chapman family witnessed the accident, which happened in Williamson County just south of Nashville.
The brother apparently did not see the little girl, McPherson said. She did not have the name or exact age of the brother, only that he is an older teenager.
The girl died later at Vanderbilt Medical Center, hospital spokeswoman Laurie Holloway said.
Chapman, originally from Paducah, Ky., and his wife have promoted international adoption and have three daughters from China, including Maria.
Chapman has won five Grammy awards and 51 Dove awards from the Gospel Music Association.
The singer's Web site said that Chapman and his wife, Mary Beth, were persuaded by their oldest daughter to adopt a girl from China. The experience led the family to adopt two more children and create Shaohannah's Hope, a foundation and ministry to financially assist thousands of couples in adoption.
The Chapmans did missionary work at Chinese orphanages in 2006 and 2007, according to the Web site.
"After our first trip to China, my wife and I knew our lives were changing — our eyes and hearts were opening to how big God really is, and we have wanted to experience more of that," Chapman says on the Web site. "We've really wondered whether or not we should just go to China and stay there. But I don't think so. I believe God is saying, 'I want you to go, get your heart broken, your eyes opened, and then take this story back to the church in America and around the world."'
Chapman also has released a book about being a father entitled "Cinderella: The Love of Daddy and his Princess." - AP
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, , environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate.
"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states. "Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
The Petition Project actually was launched nearly 10 years ago, when the first few thousand signatures were assembled. Then, between 1999 and 2007, the list of signatures grew gradually without any special effort or campaign.
But now, a new effort has been conducted because of an "escalation of the claims of 'consensus,' release of the movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' by Mr. Al Gore, and related events," according to officials with the project.
"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," said project spokesman and founder Art Robinson.
WND submitted a request to Gore's office for comment but did not get a response.
Robinson said the dire warnings about "global warming" have gone far beyond semantics or scientific discussion now to the point they are actually endangering people.
"The campaign to severely ration hydrocarbon energy technology has now been markedly expanded," he said. "In the course of this campaign, many scientifically invalid claims about impending climate emergencies are being made. Simultaneously, proposed political actions to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in poorer countries," he said.
In just the past few weeks, there have been various allegations that both shark attacks and typhoons have been sparked by "global warming."
The late Professor Frederick Seitz, the past president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and winner of the National Medal of Science, wrote in a letter promoting the petition, "The United States is very close to adopting an international agreement that would ration the use of energy and of technologies that depend upon coal, oil, and natural gas and some other organic compounds."
"This treaty is, in our opinion, based upon flawed ideas. Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful," he wrote.
Accompanying the letter sent to scientists was a 12-page summary and review of research on "global warming," officials said.
"The proposed agreement would have very negative effects upon the technology of nations throughout the world, especially those that are currently attempting to lift from poverty and provide opportunities to the over 4 billion people in technologically underdeveloped countries," Seitz wrote.
Robinson said the project targets scientists because, "It is especially important for America to hear from its citizens who have the training necessary to evaluate the relevant data and offer sound advice."
He said the "global warming agreement," written in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, and other plans "would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind."
"Yet," he said, "the United Nations and other vocal political interests say the U.S. must enact new laws that will sharply reduce domestic energy production and raise energy prices even higher.
"The inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness include the right of access to life-giving and life-enhancing technology. This is especially true of access to the most basic of all technologies: energy. These human rights have been extensively and wrongly abridged," he continued. "During the past two generations in the U.S., a system of high taxation, extensive regulation, and ubiquitous litigation has arisen that prevents the accumulation of sufficient capital and the exercise of sufficient freedom to build and preserve needed modern technology.
"These unfavorable political trends have severely damaged our energy production, where lack of industrial progress has left our country dependent upon foreign sources for 30 percent of the energy required to maintain our current level of prosperity," he said. "Moreover, the transfer of other U.S. industries abroad as a result of these same trends has left U.S. citizens with too few goods and services to trade for the energy that they do not produce. A huge and unsustainable trade deficit and rapidly rising energy prices have been the result.
"The necessary hydrocarbon and nuclear energy production technologies have been available to U.S. engineers for many decades. We can develop these resources without harm to people or the environment. There is absolutely no technical, resource, or environmental reason for the U.S. to be a net importer of energy. The U.S. should, in fact, be a net exporter of energy," he said.
He told WND he believes the issue has nothing to do with energy itself, but everything to do with power, control and money, which the United Nations is seeking. He accused the U.N. of violating human rights in its campaign to ban much energy research, exploration and development.
"In order to alleviate the current energy emergency and prevent future emergencies, we need to remove the governmental restrictions that have caused this problem. Fundamental human rights require that U.S. citizens and their industries be free to produce and use the low cost, abundant energy that they need. As the 31,000 signatories of this petition emphasize, environmental science supports this freedom," he said.
The Petition Project website today said there are 31,072 scientists who have signed up, and Robinson said more names continue to come in.
In terms of Ph.D. scientists alone, it already has 15 times more scientists than are seriously involved in the U.N.'s campaign to "vilify hydrocarbons," officials told WND.
"The very large number of petition signers demonstrates that, if there is a consensus among American scientists, it is in opposition to the human-caused global warming hypothesis rather than in favor of it," the organization noted.
The project was set up by a team of physicists and physical chemists who do research at several American institutions and collects signatures when donations provide the resources to mail out more letters.
"In a group of more than 30,000 people, there are many individuals with names similar or identical to other signatories, or to non-signatories – real or fictional. Opponents of the petition project sometimes use this statistical fact in efforts to discredit the project. For examples, Perry Mason and Michael Fox are scientists who have signed the petition – who happen also to have names identical to fictional or real non-scientists," the website said.
The petition is needed, supporters said, simply because Gore and others "have claimed that the 'science is settled' – that an overwhelming 'consensus' of scientists agrees with the hypothesis of human-caused global warming, with only a handful of skeptical scientists in disagreement."
The list of scientists includes 9,021 Ph.D.s, 6,961 at the master's level, 2,240 medical doctors and 12,850 carrying a bachelor of science or equivalent academic degree.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Thursday, May 15, 2008
When talking about the enviroment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., likes to add in a spiritual twist: "The Bible tells us in the Old Testanment, 'To minister to the needs of God's creation is an act of worship. To ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us.'" It's a nice sounding line, but it's not in the Bible. Nor does it really paraphrase any other passage, says Claude Mariottini, professor of Old Testament at Northern Baptist Theological Seminary. "It is not in the Bible. There is nothing that even approximates that." - World Magazine.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
REUTERS/Carlos Gutierrez (CHILE)
This is an amazing picture! I picture that testifies to Gods Power, Might and Beauty.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Code Pink is now resorting to witchcraft to beef up the number of its supporters protesting a controversial Marine Corps Recruiting Center in Berkeley, Calif. The women's anti-war group has told ralliers to come equipped with spells and pointy hats Friday for "witches, crones and sirens" day, the last of the group's weeklong homage to Mother's Day.
little action, and the gatherings have, until this point, been ill attended.
"Do you think they'll bring their cauldron?" - Fox News.com
lol! What next?! I can't stand this group, "Code Pink." Don't get me wrong they are expressing there freedom but they are wanting to shut down the very thing that is giving them the freedom of speech. I think this group should be sent to a country were no such freedoms exsist.
Several conditions for just war are given in the Bible. First, it must be declared by one’s government (Rm 13:4). Second, it must be in defence of the innocent and/or against and evil aggressor (e.g., Gn. 14). Third, it must be fought by just means (Dt 20:19).
P.S. I will be keeping everyone updated.