WORSHIP - PART 2: What's Wrong With Worship Today?

The short answer: Nothing.  Wait.  Everything.  Wait- what?  Who’s says what’s good?  Or who says what’s bad?

Wow.  That was clear as mud, huh?  (this is probably why I’m not a professional writer…..even if I do think I write gooder than others do…..)

This is a difficult topic to make into some kind of esoteric, individualized grandstand topic.  It’s really easy for people to say, “oh, you just don’t like the music” and leave it at that.  Let me be clear on this part of the topic- it’s not that I don’t like the newer praise music.  It’s not that. 

It’s that I hate the newer praise music with a passion that burns brighter than the sun in late July when viewed from the bottom of Death Valley while standing under a giant magnifying glass. 

I hope I cleared that up.  Moving on.

Here’s why that’s so important- worship music today is a microcosm of what is wrong with the church as a whole today.  It’s pablum.  It’s grossly over-simplified.  It utterly lacks depth and impact.  It’s the same thing over and over again.  It’s hype.  It’s messy but claims to be “cleaner” and “simpler” and “more accessible” but in reality it is ill-contrived, formulaic drivel that has no real topicality.  It has been reduced to (and, yes, I’m thinking of a certain South Park cartoon episode even as I write this) nothing more than initially filthy R&B music with the nouns changed from “her”, “she” and “baby” to “Jesus”. 

Look- I said from the outset I was going to offend.  Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Oh- and I’ve heard all the arguments, too. 

“Hillsong United sells more records worldwide than…..”

“It appeals to the masses……”

“I really feel connected…..”

Geez.  Give me a break.  Those are probably the most myopic reasons anyone can ever give.  Bands like KISS and Abba have sold more records of single albums than Hillsong United ever will.  “It appeals to the masses” can equally be applied to Britney Spears, Justin Bieber and American Idol.  And, “I really feel connected” can be applied to all kinds of things like mass riots, genocide and a host of other things.

The really scary part of this is that almost no one can really explain why this is so important, especially within the church and especially when talking about worship.  But, folks- yes, I do know the answer to this, and I expect many people reading this know the answer to and don’t/can’t admit it.  So, here goes:

We (the church) want to belong to the world at any cost.

There.  I said it.

Oh, I know that a lot of people are going to rail against this full-on.  You can if you want to, but if you’re really honest with yourself, you’ll admit that when Hillsong United does sell all those records, you find some kind of gratification that the world has acknowledged something you like, and you feel better about having made the choice in the first place.  Still fighting me on this?  Just stop it and back up a second, and try really hard to not equate the fact that you are a Christian and therefore saved with the idea that somehow this means that those ideas are ok because you are a Christian that is saved by Grace.  I got news for you:

You’re still a sinner, and you’re still capable of the same amount of corruption as everybody else.  And, that doesn’t change because you call yourself a “Christian”.

So, yeah- I’m saying that if you think that worship music is more relevant today because of the above arguments, you are wrong.  Period.  Just wrong, and you need to get over it. 

(At this point, I feel the need to point out that I said I wasn’t going to pull any punches when I started writing this series.  It’s about to get a whole lot worse.)

The church, as a whole, has found it absolutely necessary to sublimate every single thing it does in order to “appeal to the masses”, and since corporate worship is the cornerstone for the western church (way more so than solid teaching or theology) it begins there.  It began with the “seeker sensitive” movement of the late 80’s and early 90’s, and has morphed slightly into something even more pablumized like smaller churches attempting to become larger ones like Willow Creek or Hillsong.  We’ve gotten into the mindset that unless we directly correlate absolutely everything we do with today’s pop culture, we’ll be seen as “non-relevant” or “not hip” and people will leave- but in doing that, we actually make the people who have been in the church their entire lives feel “non-relevant” and “not hip” so they leave.  And, somehow that’s ok?  Huh?

It’s now as though unless your church isn’t filled with 18 to 30 year olds you’re not “successful”.  If you don’t do things that directly appeal to millenials, you’re out of touch and non-relevant.  Yes, I totally get that the generation I’m speaking of is growing larger by the moment while my generation is steadily moving towards room temperature and the generation before that has largely already kicked that nasty oxygen habit.  The issue here isn’t one of generation, but rather the lack of finding value in the entirety of the congregation and serving it. 

Let me try this another way: worship today is about serving the ones that agree with leadership’s vision and no one else.  If you don’t agree, then leadership sees YOU as the problem, not themselves.  In fact, it’s rarely ever even examined any other way.  “Oh, you know- that guy’s old and he doesn’t like what we do here, so he can just go somewhere else…..” – who hasn’t heard that in their own church?  Better yet- who hasn’t been guilty of saying that?

Right here- this guy has said it.  Hell, I’ve done worse than that- I’ve engendered it many times.  I admit it, and I admit that I was wrong to do so.  If you are one of the people that I have somehow marginalized like this, I apologize and if you are someone that I work with and I do it again, I actively ask that you call me on it when I do it, and I don’t want you to be kind about it, either.

So why did I do it?  Because it was easy. 

And this, right here, is the crux of the problem- easy.  It’s really easy to only want to partner with a small group of select individuals that agree with you.  It’s a LOT harder to work with those that don’t, and in a church congregation there is disparity and diversity in it’s rawest forms and those people have just as much right to be there and have their needs attended to as the ones that do agree with you.  Worship – real, authentic worship – is hard, hard, messy work because it’s all about people, and people are messy and hard to deal with.

As worship participants, we have completely lost sight of this, and it translates everywhere if you know where to look.  The music is easier, the charts are “easier”, the technology is easier, the communication methods are “easier”- we’re so concerned with being “relevant” that we never actually stop to think if we are serving our entire congregations or just a select few.  We can plan a service that is so complicated that a year’s supply of Ritalin won’t begin to cover the attention deficits we create, but we never stop to wonder if that’s what our congregation needs.  We can create elaborate and hip videos, use the technology we have access to to make our meager bands on Sunday morning sound like the London Philharmonic by using loops, and we can obsess about “dead air” during a service, but we can’t be bothered to consider the ones who don’t agree with what WE are “trying to do” because the mission has become the mission, and Jesus is very often marginalized in the process. 

As the church, we are supposed to be set apart from the world, not trying to garner its favor by turning everything we do into something that looks like a major concert event.  But, instead we have somehow decided that it’s more “relevant” to be “relevant” by the means and measures of the world, and the whole time our congregations actually do suffer for it.

And, before you say something like, “that’s not my church” – ask yourself this: are you saying that because you are part of the agreeing crowd?  If that’s the reason, then you are actually part of the problem.  That is, unless you want to do something about it by rolling up your sleeves and getting dirty.

Hey- this whole topic is difficult.  I get it.  And I know that I sound angry in this installment, and that’s because I am.  Yes, it’s partially because I am now in the generation that is being ignored in a lot of cases.  It’s really more because I realize that the excuses being given by the people who do this are bullshit at the very core.

If you find yourself being angry at what I’ve written here, all I can say is that being angry is part of taking the easy road.  If we can’t talk about this honestly, then I am forced to wonder what the hell we all do this for in the first place.  People are messy animals and have warts and horns and things we don’t want to see – especially ourselves – but if you are a worship participant in any form, you signed on to work with these messy animals, and to think that there’s an easy way to do that makes you delusional.

If you are someone who organizes worship services, or even just participates in them, there is nothing wrong with some introspection here and you know that.  No doubt, I’ve ruffled some feathers here, and as I said when I began this series, I will not apologize for that.  A good feather ruffling is necessary sometimes, and just because the writer of this blog has been a “behind the scenes” player in a lot of this doesn’t make my viewpoint any less valid.  I understand your job is difficult, but so is mine in supporting you and I dare say that the job of supporting you is even harder for a congregant who feels like they are on the outside looking in.  All I would ask is that you consider those people – even before you consider me – because those that are on the outside don’t really like being there.

WORSHIP - What To Expect

Just in case you might be thinking that this entire series is going to be nothing but sour grapes, I actually do have a plan here.  Here’s the parts to the series, and I’m going to try to get these done one per week, as time allows:

PART 1:
Why Am I So Passionate About This?

PART 2:
What's Wrong With Worship Today?

PART 3:
Dispelling The Myth Of Formula

PART 4:
Why Do We Worship?  Who Are We Playing For?

PART 5:
Is Bigger Really Better?

PART 6:
To Obey Is Better Than Sacrifice

PART 7:
The Performance vs. Worship Conundrum

PART 8:
Words Or Music- Which Is More Important?

PART 9:
What Does Success Look Like?

WORSHIP–Overview and Part I: Why Are You So Passionate About This?

Over the years, I have run my mouth time and time again about the topic of worship in church.  Numerous times during my rants and raves, I’ve been asked to write down what I’m talking about, and a recent post on Facebook by some friends really spurred me on to finally doing it.  But, before I do, I wanted to give a brief overview of what I intend to cover in my little “series” – mainly to provide context, but also to warn folks.

The first warning is this- if you aren’t the least bit interested in worship music or playing in church, then this will be extremely boring, so just don’t bother.

The second warning, tho- I am probably going to offend some people deeply with what I’m going to say.  In fact, I absolutely guarantee it.  More than that- I’m not going to be apologetic about it.  What I’m attempting to do here is to spur some thought on this matter that is very, very close to me and I intend to pull no punches here.  It’s not that I seek to cause pain or even be controversial, but as someone who has spent 40+ years playing all kinds of music – worship and otherwise - and has done so largely behind the scenes, I think I have a rather unique viewpoint that has been pretty much disregarded of late, and might prove to be expository.  Exposition is sometimes painful- I don’t wish to cause this pain, but I’ll tell you right now that it’s gonna happen, so just be ready.  I’m also pretty sure that this will cost me some playing time and I dare say a few “friends”, but I really don’t want to remain silent on this any longer.

Everything is discussable, however, and I welcome any and all discussion on these matters.

Before I begin, I want to give some context: I am not a Biblical scholar nor am I a pedigreed theologian.  What I intend to talk about here is more “behind the scenes” stuff that a lot of folks don’t want to necessarily talk about- but I have no intention of doing this as a dissertated series.  This are things that have come from my POV and I have seen the first-hand fallout (both good and bad) of these things over many, many years.  What I am, however, is an educated and skilled musician and audio engineer who has more than earned his stripes in order to voice these opinions.  So, let’s get to Part I:

Part I: Why Are You So Passionate About This?

A few years ago, when I decided to get out of playing regular worship services, I wrote a series of articles about my journey.  The thrust was to point out that not only had I “been there, done that, bought the t-shirt” , but that I had actually helped build the actual t-shirt factory.  This was really more a passive/aggressive way of me giving myself the “out” I needed in order to move on.

What I didn’t say in that series is this: participating in worship services at a musical level actually saved my life.

Now that’s a pretty serious statement to make, but the fact of the matter was that I was a drug addict who considered himself to be a Christian (and I still maintain that I was, too) but had some self-destructive habits in his life.  Yeah- we all have those, but this was a little different: it could have literally killed me.  It never did, though - I never overdosed; I never lost a job; I wasn’t homeless; I had lots of friends- in fact, I actually had a good time being that addict, truth be told.  But, the inescapable fact is that this behavior would have eventually led to my death.  And I knew that- and more than that- I wanted that.

Let that sink in for a moment- I was an addict, and a musician, and a Christian, and I wanted to die.

Lest you think this is a trite story, no, I didn’t not start playing worship music to save me or my soul- I was actively playing it WHILE I was an addict.  I can’t tell you how many times I would show up at church to play stoned or drunk out of my mind and was barely functional.  I did it a lot.  I mean a lot.

We could go in to why I was a drug addict, but that would be a very deep tangent.  Rather than avoid the topic altogether, I will say that my mother was a prescription drug addict.  After she divorced my father when I was 7 years old, she married an incredibly angry man who physically abused (beat) me for many years.  My mother also beat me many, many times.  I ended up abusing drugs for all the reasons you’re thinking and more- but we’re not here to discuss that, and that’s all the farther I intend to go on that topic.

When I first got cleaned up, I had to stop playing in church for a bit because no one trusted me, and they shouldn’t have.  I don’t begrudge them for that (and I didn’t then, either) but what I found was that I was aching to actually play music that had a depth to it that transcended just making semi-linear noise with other people.  Music has always been something spiritual to me, regardless of it’s impetus.  When I got clean and re-dedicated my life to God, I needed to play for Him rather than myself.  I would try very, very hard to consecrate anything I played for God- and in a largely secular arena that was sometimes difficult to do.

Before I thought I was really ready to return to playing in church, I was asked by people in my church to do so.  I told them no.  Not yet.  I had a feeling I would be “let know” when the time was right.  And, that happened, too- and I’m not gonna lie and tell you that it was some magical, epiphanal moment when it happened.  It literally happened one day when I was talking to a friend who happened to be a choir director at another church who had asked me to do some choral transcription work- and I just asked her, “So- do you need a bass player?” – and that was it.  I went back.

However, what I found when I did go back was epiphanal.  Here I was, surrounded by people who’s same purpose was mine.  Everyone wanted the same thing.  It wasn’t richter jazz-fusion, either- it was for a performance of a JS Bach piece – and for some reason I just “got it”.  Not the music, and not the performance of it- it was kind of on another plane, much, much deeper than that.  I knew that Bach had written absolutely everything for God (he famously signed the bottom of his scores “für die Herrlichkeit Gottes im Höchsten”, or “for the Glory of God in the Highest”) but I didn’t really get what that meant until I cleaned my act up and re-dedicated myself.  I’m not even sure I can explain that now, some 30 years later.

In doing this – waiting to get myself right – I realized that I would never go back to being that addict again.  Yes- I did stumble a few times, but always momentarily and always with immediate accountability – but not because I was scared of the potential outcome, but because I never, ever wanted anything to come between me and that feeling of “got it”.

So, sure.  One could make the case that I have limited objectivity due to a life changing event on a certain topic, and they would be right.  But ask yourself this question: does that make me less qualified to want to make this type of experience any less?  Does my prior experience here invalidate the subsequent experiences?  The answer here is a clear and resounding “no”, and the reason I can say that without any reservation whatsoever is because time and time again, I have first hand witnessed what that spirit of “got it” has done for me and done for others even and especially when I wasn’t looking for it.

And now, some 33 years after that, I am literally watching one of the most unique and life-altering art forms die and become non-relevant.  Yes, I said “die”, because that’s exactly what it’s doing.  The worst part of it is that it’s dying because we as musicians are killing it.  No, I don’t think that this is God’s doing (forget the idea of ‘seasons’ here) and I don’t think it’s the work of Satan, either.  It’s US that’s doing it- because we’ve somehow decided that there are rights and wrongs, do’s and don’t do’s, trappings we have to have and formula to play it all out and measure “success” as though it’s a number.  We, as a church, have completely lost touch with the idea that we have an individual community to serve within our congregations, and we do that by trying to be like other churches in order to garner that success.  We ignore the needs of that community wholesale in the form of doing things like making Sunday mornings into something that looks like a sporting event, and when anything or anyone challenges that idea we’ve started saying things like “they’re prideful” or “they’re just trying to draw attention to themselves” without any consideration at all.  As musicians and worship leaders, we try for “easy wins” for our participants in the form of non-challenging music and non-challenging messages in the hopes that a constant state of kum-by-ah will enamor people enough to decide to pick up an instrument or twiddle with knobs on a weekend without practicing or knowing what they are doing.  We’ve created a faux hierarchy of certain people in certain positions that are more important than others, but we dare not speak of that until things get challenged, and then our teeth get bared and people leave.

It’s easy to say that since the church is run by sinners (since all of us are) that we can and will have problems.  That’s a true statement, and it’s always going to be the case, but what I’ve seen recently is the delivery of that statement and a hunched set of shoulders to go with it as though we just have to accept it.  And if we don’t, we’re a “malcontent” or worse- our faith is questioned.

And worship music – whatever its form – is at the center of all of this.  The fact is that more people leave churches over the topic of the music played than they do for bad teaching or theology.  As musicians, it is incumbent upon us to provide what needs to be provided- but we are always told that our job isn’t that important; until it is. 

I just can’t stand by and watch this happen.  I just can’t do it.  Yes, my life would be infinitely easier if I just rolled with these punches, but for me it’s all about the authenticity and “realness” more than it is about just placating.

So, here we go, folks.  Buckle up- or not- you don’t have to read this.  I might be the most arrogant guy on this particular rock in space for thinking for a moment that anyone would be interested in what I have to say here.  It’s gonna be 100% me trying to help, but also 100% cathartic, too. 

All I hope for is that someone, somewhere will at least take the time to think about this, because if they do then it was all worth it.

a supposed conversation (a work of fiction)

It’s 8:41AM on Wednesday, November 9, 2016.  I’ve just finished my 8AM scrum call with the members of my dev team, where much of the conversation revolved around the election and almost no talk of work – and my cell phone rings.  It’s Dad, and it’s his every-4-year post-election morning call.  I settle back in my chair and take a nice long drink of my now lukewarm coffee.  This is gonna be good.

“Hey!  Somehow, I knew you’d call.” I answer.

“You didn’t really think I would miss this chat, did you?”, Dad says.  I can hear him smiling.

“So…..how long did you watch last night?  Was there much yelling at the TV?”, I ask knowing at least part of the answer.

“Not a lot of yelling.  Some hand wringing for sure.  I think I fell asleep right around the time Wisconsin went to Trump.  I still can’t believe that happened.” he says, flatly.

“Can’t believe what?  Wisconsin or Trump?” I ask.

“Well……both.”, he replies.

“You voted for Hillary, right?” I ask.

“Of course I did.  Did you vote for ‘The Donald’?” he asks.  He never refers to him as anything else, and he always votes straight Democrat ticket.

“Absolutely not.  That guy is a fool.  I actually voted for Johnson.”

“Well, I’m just glad you voted.  Weren’t you afraid of wasting your vote?” he asks, wryly.

“I gave that some thought.  I don’t look at it that way.  I’m just tired of the establishment, and I just cannot stand the thought of another Clinton.  I would have happily voted for Bernie.  If there was a Bush in the running, I couldn’t have voted for them, either.” I answer.

“That’s my boy.  Any vote isn’t a wasted vote.  I’m proud of ya.” he says.  Not the answer I expected.

“I’m really curious as to what you think happened here?” I ask.  I’m genuinely confused.

“That’s the real question now, isn’t it?  I think what we just saw was a replay of the 1948 Truman and Dewey election.  The press was so sure that Dewey was gonna win, they all but called it for him before the vote was cast.  You’ve seen that famous picture of the Chicago Daily Tribune, right?  I remember that really well.  My dad brought one of those papers home.” he says.  I’ve heard that story so many times.

“I have seen that picture many, many times.” I reply.  “I have never understood how the Tribune could have made that prediction.  Didn’t it take a long time to get election results back then?” I ask.

“It did, but that apparently didn’t matter to them.  Remember that Chicago wasn’t exactly the bastion of political reality back then.” he replies, laughing.

“I’m curious as to what Grandma and Grandpa’s reaction was to that headline.  Were they happy about who actually won?” I ask.

“They weren’t exactly happy and they weren’t exactly sad.  The whole country was still very much for anything having to do with FDR, and Dewey’s campaign seemed to not be very in touch with that.  I think my folks were more worried about Dewey being out of touch than they were about Harry.” he replied.  That makes sense, knowing my grandparents.  They were die-hard Democrats.

“So, where did the Dems go wrong?” I ask.

“It’s probably a bunch of things.  My guess would be that they tried to force a candidate that no one was really terribly interested in.  She was perfectly capable of doing the job, and would have done a great job, but after that news came out that the DNC kind of railroaded Bernie, it seems like they lost steam.” he says.

“Would you have voted for Bernie?” I ask.

“If he were the candidate, I would have.  I voted for Hillary in the primaries.  I don’t think Bernie could have won, though.  He was too old.” he says.

“Yeah, but wasn’t Reagan older?” I ask.

“I honestly don’t remember who was older, but the Democrats have had a habit of always wanting someone younger since JFK.” he says.  “Besides, you’re asking about a Republican.  I can’t answer that because I don’t think that way.  Those people are crazy.” he says.

“Nice.” I say.

“But, seriously, I don’t think that Bernie was electable, but not just because of age.  I think his ideas are not really in keeping with the rest of the people he’d need to be working with.” he continued.

“I agree with that, unfortunately.” I answer.  “I gave that some thought.  If the Dems didn’t field Hillary, who would you rather they have fielded?”

“The fielded the right candidate.” he answered.

“So what went wrong?  Why did this happen then?  No one saw this coming.” I ask.

“I really think what we saw last night was more of a rejection election than anything else.  Hillary has made a couple of major mistakes like the email thing and her handling of Benghazi.  I don’t think she did anything illegal on either of those, but the way she handled it wasn’t very good.  She always seemed to appear above it all to me.  I think the American people saw that, too.  And then there’s the problem with the Mid-West.  She didn’t do well in most of it.” he says.

“Yeah.  I know.  It always seems like the Dems ignore fly-over country, but Barry did that, too, and still won over Romney last time.” I say.

“I really wish you wouldn’t call him ‘Barry’.  It sounds disrespectful.” he says, admonishing me.

“I just call ‘em like I see ‘em.” I reply.

“Mr. Obama has done some great things for this country, you know.” he says.  He’s angry.

“Name one thing.” I say.

“Obamacare is a great thing.  He’s gotten your children insurance.  He’s gotten the economy back on track after George ruined it for everybody.  He’s united his party during a very difficult time, and he’s made a lot headway in getting moderates a voice in the government.” he says, flatly.

“I don’t see it that way.  Obamacare is nothing more than a tax being paid by people who can’t afford it in the first place.  And the economy didn’t tank because of W.  It tanked because there were a lot of greedy bankers in this country that made bad loans, and everything tipped over.” I retort.  I hate it when he brings this up.

“Yeah, but it happend on George’s watch and he didn’t do enough to stop it when it did.” he replies.

“He was working with an all Democrat House and Senate.  And, as you like to point out, that’s where the money is.” I spat out.

“Whatever you say.  All I know is that we’re in a better place for Mr. Obama than we were before he was elected.”

“Are we?  The Dems just cratered, Dad.  Did you forget?” I reply.

“No, I didn’t forget.  Do you want to hear what I think happened last night, or do you want to try and teach me history?” he asks.

“I do want to hear what you think.” I say, backing off.

“So, you know the farmers.  They always think no one cares, and they are always just about to go out of business, right?” he asks.

“Yep.  I know that well.”  I reply.  I’ve heard this first-hand since a lot of my family are farmers.

“They are always looking to blame someone for that, and the US Government has always been a favorite target.” he replies.

“But what is different this time?  They blamed ‘Mr. Obama’, too.” I say.  I have my fingers up in the air doing air quotes.

“I think what they did was to more actively vote against Hillary instead of voting for The Donald.”

“That seems like an over-simplification to me, Dad.” I reply.

“I think it’s really that simple.  You have a better idea?” he asks.

“I really don’t.” I say.

My coffee is now ice cold.  Great.

“Ok, I have another question.  What do you think is going to happen with a president named ‘Trump’”?  I’m baiting him.

“Absolutely nothing.” he says.  That surprises me.

“Why do you say that?” I ask, confused.

“Because The Donald has made way too many enemies.  No one is going to help him do anything.” he says.

“Yeah, but the Congress is all Republican.” I say.

“He’s made way too many enemies there, too.  Remember him holding up Mr. Graham’s phone number during the campaign?” he says.

“I don’t.” I say.  I didn’t pay much attention to Trump during the campaign.

“Well, he did.  That was pretty low, and he made the whole campaign very personal.” he says.

“Oh, and Hillary didn’t?” I ask.  Wait- am I defending The Donald?

“No, she did, too.  In fact, that’s probably the single biggest thing she did wrong.  She should have ignored him and let him dig his own hole.” he says.

“So you’re saying that he won’t get anything done, then.” I say.

“Not much, I think.  He’s gonna have a heckuva time getting anyone to do anything he says.”

“What about executive orders?  Can’t he do that?” I ask.

“Those are very much double-edged swords.  The rest of the government really doesn’t like it when the President does that, regardless of their party.  They want to have a say in things, and if they don’t get it, they pout.” he says.

“Yeah, but he can still do it.”

“And, when he does, it makes it that much harder for him to push through real legislation.  Every time he does that, he makes himself a target by the powers that can impeach him, too- and you just know that they’re just looking for a reason to do that.  Constantly embarrassing people like that is not a good thing.” he says.  That makes sense to me.

“What about things like gay rights, illegal aliens, the Wall and mass deportations?” I ask.

“Those are things that could happen, actually.  He could sign an executive order to do some of those things, but the problem is that he won’t be able to sustain it.” he says.

“How’s that?  If he writes the order, they have to do it, right?” I ask.

“They do and they don’t.  He can start things moving in a direction, but someone has to pay for it.  That’s where the Congress comes in.” he says.

“Yep.  And they’re all Republicans.  That’ll be easy.” I reply.

“Not so fast, junior.  There’s an election coming in 2 years for House seats, and a lot of folks are really, really nervous about keeping their jobs right now.  If they think that supporting The Donald is going to cost them votes and their job, they’re going to think about making that decision at least twice.  And, once he doesn’t get his way on an executive order, that makes it easier and easier for people to refuse him when he issues more of those orders.” he says.

Holy hell.  He’s right.

“So, what you’re saying is that he’s going in as a 4-year lame duck?”

“Not exactly that, but pretty much.” he says.

“So what worries you about him?” I ask.

“His mouth.  He has no filter and he doesn’t act like a President should.” he says.

“And, that’s all?” I ask.

“Ha!  Hardly.  The man is a walking hormone.  He can’t keep anything to himself!” he says.

“Isn’t that the same thing as ‘his mouth’ being the problem?”

“Maybe.  Yes.  No.  Er…..I guess.  All I know is that I’m pretty sure he’s going to say something terrible to someone important, and that’s not going to go well for anybody.” he says.

“At last!  Something you and I agree on!” I exclaim.

“I dunno.  Mr. Johnson said some things that made me cringe on an almost daily basis.” he says.

“And he was a Democrat.” I answer.

“Barely!” he says.

“So, do you think we’re going to get 4 or 8 years of Trump?” I ask.

“No one knows the answer to that, but I’ll be surprised if he makes it 4 years.  I’m way more interested in Mr. Pence than The Donald.  I think we’re gonna need to know a lot more about him.” he says.  He can call the VP by name, but not Trump.  Funny.

“You think it’s likely that he’ll get impeached?” I ask.

“Pence?  No.  I meant The Donald.” he says.

“I know what you meant.  You think Trump will be impeached?” I ask.

“I think we might see it happen, actually.  It’s really, really hard to do, but The Donald does seem to be someone who will motivate people.” he says.

“That’s funny.” I reply.

“Not really if you think about it.  When Johnson was impeached back in the 1800’s, it was very messy and ended up being something of a joke because it was toothless.”

“And Johnson was never removed from office, either.” I reply.

“Nope.  In the end, they just couldn’t get it together, and we ended up with Grant because he was a war hero and not much other than that.  And, he was an absolute abysmal choice.  He spent most of his time in office drunk, and got nothing done.” he says.

“Kind of like Trump?” I ask.

“Worse.  Grant did things like perpetuate the Indian Wars and had a lot of people killed as a result.  I don’t see The Donald doing that.” he says.

“I don’t either.  At least I hope not.” I say.

“Nah.  Even The Donald is not that stupid.  At least I don’t think so.  There’s too many other things that would get in the way of that like the ACLU.” he says.

“Ah, yes.  The Anti-Christian Luciferian Union.” I say.

“Yeah.  Right.  At least I know where you stand on that.” he says.

“I’ve made no secret of that.” I reply.  “So where does this leave us, then?” I ask.

“We’ll just have to see.  All I know is that we’ll survive this.  It’s gonna be interesting, that’s for sure.” he says.

“Yeah.  We agree on that.” I say.  Its now after 9.

“Dad, I gotta scoot.  Thanks for the talk.” I say.

“Anytime.  Bye-bye.”

“Bye, Dad.  I love ya, even if you are a Commie.”

“I love you, too.  In spite of you actually being a Republican and you just don’t want to admit it.”

well, we’ll see

So, tomorrow it all ends.  Personally, I can’t wait.

The thing is, I’m pretty sure it won’t end.  DT hasn’t got a chance in hell of being elected, despite the media saying the race is “close”.  When he loses, I’m 100% sure he’ll contest it.

Remember- the goal of DT is to accumulate attention and money no matter how he does it.  I’ve been convinced since 2013 that he’s really in this for the book deal, and there’s a ton of Kardashian-watching sheep that will buy this book and make him richer.  That’s the goal right there, kids.

Now, when he contests the election, the media is going to ignite a veritable firestorm and say things like, “this has never happened before” and that we are on some kind of legal precipice.  The short and non-dramatic answer here is that elections have been contested before, and the losing party does not have to acquiesce to make the election legitimate.  The phone call from the losing candidate to the winning candidate is nothing more than political theater and holds absolutely no legal context for the finalization of an election.  It’s just gonna be a “sore loser” thing, because once the Electoral College and a judge certifies the election results, that’s it.  It’s over, and that’s all there is to it.

So, when this happens, don’t panic in the least.  I’d go further and suggest a quick change of the TV channel to something more topical and accurate, like Golden Girls or M*A*S*H.

The other side of this is even more interesting.  If, by some chance DT does win, it is absolutely, positively not the end of the world or the US.  If you paid attention in US Government class in school (ahem) you know by now that the POTUS is the weakest 1/3 of the US governmental body, and all the crapola that DT (and HRC) and every single other POTUS candidate has ever thrown out there as “policy” takes votes everywhere to happen.  DT has absolutely no friends in Washington, and while I typically hate the whole “political machine”, it will prove extremely useful in quelling DT’s hysterical policies.  No one will side with him, no one will vote for anything he proposes, and if he does win he will be the single most flaccid POTUS we’ve had since Warren Harding.  And, for those of you who are sheep and believe the whole “but he has his finger on the bomb” BS that you’re being fed, think again- the US Armed Forces has safeguards in place that are not being mentioned by the media (or HRC) that keep him from just launching a nuclear attack on anyone.  He won’t build a wall, he won’t deport anyone – he can’t because for him to do it means that he has to control the money – and he doesn’t – and he has to have votes – and he won’t have them, either.

The other thing to remember is that there is legal recourse in this country to recall a POTUS- impeachment. 

No listen carefully here- to date, there has been no completely successful impeachment against a sitting US President.  There have been a total of 3 attempts: Andrew Johnson (right after Abraham Lincoln), Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.  None of them were actually impeached and removed from office- and Nixon’s proceedings never even started because he stepped down before it could start.  Impeaching a POTUS is an incredibly difficult thing to do from the standpoint of having to have all the resources lined up PERFECTLY to do it.  In the case of Johnson and Clinton, there just wasn’t enough people in agreement to get it done, and the initial cause on both proceedings was too ambiguous for people to really get behind.  DT has both a foot that likes to live in his mouth and absolutely no friends on The Hill, and when (not if) he steps in it, I think we’ll actually see it happen and he will be removed from office.  That’s ok with DT, because he gets another book deal out of it.

What I’m getting at here kids is this: the difference between tomorrow and the next day is absolutely nothing, regardless of who wins.  The media will have you believe differently, and since most people only seem to care about the actual state of governmental affairs when there’s an election on, the media will be able to cultivate that panic.  Don’t be fooled.  Read your history, the Constitution and realize that the guys that wrote that document and formed the idea of “checks and balances” were getting us ready for a day just like tomorrow.

raise your hands

A couple of hundred years ago, and after much griping and complaining about the sound mix at church, the music leadership at my church decided some training was in order, and they asked me to do it.

This was actually quite a coup, because the sound personnel we had were constantly at odds with our musicians.  To better understand this, the musicians were all nationally known players and had both national and international credits for both studio and live dates.  Our sound folks were literally “weekend warriors” who had absolutely no experience outside of a Sunday morning service.  The musicians had started out asking for things politely, but they were honestly never attended to, and over time this relationship eroded away until it became an “us vs. them” scenario at every turn.  It was not healthy at all, and I will reluctantly admit that I played a part in furthering this division many, many times- I was not making things better. 

After a time, the leadership approached me and asked if I would be willing to offer an olive branch by showing the sound team a few “tricks” – what I really wanted to show them were basics like proper gain staging, the use of compression and eq, etc.  When the music leadership finally came up with a time and event to have me try, they put out the word that all sound team members should attend.  If it went well, we’d do this again, too.  The response was pretty lukewarm, and this made it doubly hard as this was a “church-in-a-box”, which meant that every single service required a complete sound load-in, and if there wasn’t help to do it, it would be tough.

The evening of the concert finally came, and I arrived to do the load-in.  Not one single sound team member showed up to help.  This meant that I had to rally the troops that were there to do the load-in, and we accomplished it.  I got set up, got the mikes and monitors going and we did a soundcheck- all was well with the band that had come in to back the concert.  (Different band by design.)

Just after the concert started, 4 or 5 of the sound team members appeared and quietly took up chairs on the opposite side of the soundboard where I was, making observation from them completely impossible.  This was by their design- when they hadn’t showed up for load-in, the music leaders had called them all at home and pleaded with them to come down, which they did, albeit grudgingly.  When they did arrive, they all decided to protest by sitting on the opposite side of the room.

When the musical leadership saw this, they were very, very upset, and joined me at the soundboard where I decided to show them what I was doing and why.  We went through things like what unity gain was, using the low-end rolloff filters and eq notching to make vocals more present, eq’ing the kick and bass and employing a quick side-chain for them both to provide space- and the leaders were pretty amazed that things sounded as good as they did, especially since I was using the exact same gear that was used on every Sunday morning. (The crew was always complaining about the equipment) We had a great time back there, laughing and talking, and everyone (including me) learned a lot that evening- for me, I came to have a much better understanding of what the leaders were looking for in a service (it wasn’t what I thought it was, either) and got to hear from them about some of the misgivings over organizing others.  It was a great night, actually.  But, I had to show them what “the next level” looked like.  I motioned to the music director:

“Check this out- I don’t know if you realize this or not, but a well organized and knowledgeable engineer can really make more of a difference during a service than you might think.”

“Really?” he answered.  “In what way?  I assume you don’t just mean volume.” he added.

In typical fashion, I had set up two Yamaha SPX90’s with hall reverb settings (that should tell you how long ago this was) and had them assigned into auxiliary returns and back to sub-mixes; one for the vocals and one for some of the instruments like snare drum, guitar and keys – pretty standard stuff.  This allowed me to decide how much reverb I wanted at any given time.

“I’ll show you.  Watch this.”

I quickly grabbed the aux send for the instrument reverb and added everything into it except bass.  Then, I raised the reverb levels into the 2 sub-mixes that they were feeding.  The room suddenly got a lot bigger sounding, and really smoothed out with the vocals swimming in a shimmering pool of reverb.

Instantly, every hand in the auditorium went up.  And, I mean every single one of them, including the recalcitrant sound team.  And one of the music leaders, too.

The guy I was talking to was amazed.

“That’s not the cool part.  Wanna see me make them put their hands back down?” I asked.  He nodded.

I took the reverb away. 

And, almost every hand went back down immediately.

Now, while that may sound funny (and it was) it shows that artistry exists in every facet of a performance, if you know where to look.  There’s no shortcuts to experience, either.  One has to embrace a couple of things to be an artist – whatever the medium – and paramount to that is to realize that there’s always someone who is better at your job than you are.   At the same time, all the training in the world for a given task doesn’t give anyone the right to say they know it all.  I had a lot to learn that night, and was changed by being willing to receive and acknowledge that.

words from different people mean different things

A very good friend of mine sent me this cartoon as a thought provoking item and asked me what I thought of it.  While it is thought provoking, my response to this is a little too complex for a quick Facebook answer, so I thought I'd write it here instead.

At first blush, this is something of a "societal statement", but it underpins a dangerous thing I see in how people perceive news and the occasional "microwave moment".  You see, there's a penchant today for trying to find the optimal trump card for an argument (pun somewhat intended) that really serves no purpose other than to shut down any kind of dialog.  This cartoon is totally in keeping with that sentiment.  I'm not trying to cast my friend in the light of being someone shallow enough to just stop a dialog from continuing, but there are a lot of people who do that sort of thing, and it really bothers me- because these types of memes are extremely superficial and do absolutely nothing in helping people change their thought processes.  No matter what anyone may say about this, all additional dialog is met with nothing more than the content of this meme, and a wry statement like, "made ya think, didn't it?".  Yeah, it did, but there's a whole lot more to this dialog that this meme doesn't cover and no one is going to be better about processing what could be construed as "cognitive dissonance" with this in their face.

There is a tremendous difference between the two statements and an even bigger difference between the reaction to them.  Before you start arguing the meme's superficial argument, permit me to tell you why that is a fact.

First off, Mr. Trump is on his way to attempting to be President of the United States.  (Let's call that POTUS for brevity) and Colin Kaepernick is not.  What that means is that he really should have a plan for changing what he calls "not great", and even though I agree with about 10-12% of what Mr. Trump says, he does have a "plan".  Is it a great plan?  No.  Is it an attainable plan?  No.  Will he make it happen- most likely not- and that's not because he's an idiot (he is that) but, rather it's because he lacks both the political clout and the mental ability to make it happen.  What Kaepernick is saying is without a plan to go forward- that is, he wants everyone else to do the work.  He isn't in any position - nor will he ever be - to make a bit of difference other than to try to illuminate a "problem" that he sees as there.  In the end, Kaepernick's protest is doomed, (so is Trump's for that matter) but the thrust of their statements actually has a completely different weight.

The reaction, though- that's what's really different.  What the issuer of the above meme is actually saying is that there is something wrong with society because they react differently to the speaker.  This is really the crux of the matter for me, because what society thinks is that unless we all agree on everything, there's something wrong with us.  What society would call the correct response is that everyone agrees with everyone else on all topics- but it's more than that- they want agreement on the issues to come from the same thought process.  What's super-dangerous about that is this:

Who dictates what thought process is right?  This is where our freedoms really come into play.

Let's call it like it is.  Mr. Trump wants to work and continually does work (despite what you may think) and has spent his career amassing his wealth by years and years of business acumen.  (You can say whatever you like about it, but the man is a smart business man.  Do I agree with everything he does?  Hardly.) Mr. Kaepernick has his $11.9 million dollar salary guaranteed because he plays with a ball.

Do Mr. Kaepernick and Mr. Trump have the right to say what they say?  You bet your bippy they do.  They both have an equal right to their opinions under the law.  But, as a society do we have the right to say "yeah" to one and "boo" the other?  Again- your bippy is in danger here because we absolutely do, and there is nothing wrong with a difference in the reaction.

Why is their nothing wrong with that difference?

Because one of them has more value than the other.  Yes, it's that simple.

Or, think of it another way- Mr. Trump's opinion could have MUCH longer living ramifications if left to it's own devices.  Mr. Kaepernick's opinions effects will only last as long as he is in the limelight, and only if he actually does something about it, and I guarantee that won't happen.  Even if Mr. Trump does not win the election (Dear God, hear our prayer.....) his opponent is going to have to address the statements he has made in the form of stated policy and a path forward.  (That has already happened.)  If Trump's opponents were to base their policy reform on what Mr. Kaepernick says, most of the conscious US populace would roll their eyes and call them on the carpet for it, and the rest would go back to watching "Keeping Up With The Kardashians".

But, make no mistake- both of the people above are complete and total idiots.  They aren't worthy of being paid attention to, but Mr. Trump has a slight advantage in validity because he is running for POTUS.  Both of them have a right to say what they say, however misguided they might be, and both of them can get different reactions and that is not wrong, and there is much more to the dialog than a stupid meme can possibly offer.

So- what does one do when they run across a cartoon like the above?  I say, post it and ask the thought provoking questions, but be ready to be corrected and don't use something like this as an argument-ender.  The really cool thing about these kinds of memes is that they do start conversations.  The bad part is when they are used to just stop that dialog before it starts.