What? President Bush asked for only $1B for the Moon/Mars program?? That isn't enough. The program is probably dead before it begins. I don't think he'll get the money for it unless he is careful about what districts he plans to involve in the program. Gotta keep those senators well fed or they get cranky. The Air Force was very good in doing this with the building of the B-2.

I had a dream yesterday and all I can remember is the phrase "Remember, you can't say 'toy' before you go chubby!" What can this mean? Come to think of it, I don't want to know.

I'm stoked about the rover on Mars. Even more so by the possibility of a future manned trip there. But something is bugging me about it too. The purpose is to see if Mars could have once supported life. Okay. Fair enough. If life exists on other planets, I think it would be cool to see how He did it there. What is brushing my fur the wrong way is that I suspect scientists are doing this in hopes of proving evolution.

If you read Carl Sagan's book Contact (or see the movie for that matter) what you find out is that Sagan believed that the existence of life on another planet would show that evolution was a law and not a theory. Furthermore it appears that Sagan believed this revelation would send many/most of the religious people in the world over the edge. They would not be able to deal with it. Whatever.

So back on Earth, we're throwing out judges who refuse to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments* and suspending kids who say "God bless" at the end of a broadcast on a public school radio station (insert your favorite "separation of church and state" story here) while at the same time we're spending billions to help scientists prove their religion of evolution? I'm not saying that we should scrap the Mars missions, but I'm not sure if we need to go there to find out if Mars once supported life as much as we should be going to see if Mars can be made to support human life now. That's right, we're talking terraforming baby!

* I don't agree with Judge Moore, I think he took it too far and took matters into his own hands when he defied a court order. There was more than just the Ten Commandments written on it, there was a reference to natural law or something like that. Still, I don't believe the monument needed to be removed.

I'm going in tomorrow to drop Hebrew. I just squeaked by Elementary Hebrew I and when I sit down to study for E.H.II, I stress out so bad. Nothing looks familiar and I should know it. I'll do E.H.I again in the fall. Instead, I'm hoping to take a class on Karl Barth taught by Dr. Kevin Vanhoozer. Either that or one on church history by Dr. Woodbridge. We'll see.

I took my son and saw Master and Commander again last night (second time for both of us, first time together). That is one I'm going to get on DVD. What a story!

Anyway, it made me realize what is wrong with Star Trek these days. I could never put my finger on what was missing from Voyager and Enterprise. Was it the requisite hot chick in the tight jump suit? Was it bad writing? Was it the lack of a compelling storyline? Yea, it was all that but it was more. In M&C, there was a great story but there was also a touch of James T. Kirk, too. Jack Aubrey was a man of the sea. He knew his ship and crew and was a master seaman. The Surprise was out on its own with a mission to complete. Her captain was driven and committed. Her crew was dedicated to that mission and that man. That is what is missing from Star Trek since the end of DS9. I never got the idea that Janeway or Archer really are in control. They seldom use their skills and cunning to win the day. It seems they sort of blunder through each episode. That didn't happen with Kirk or Picard. You felt that these men were in charge of their ships and their destinies. Sisko sort of got to that point with the Dominian War but Janeway... ah poor Janeway. She tried to be tough but you just expected her to bake a batch of cookies at any moment. And Archer? It is all new and unknown to him. He doesn't even trust his ship fully.

I think the producers of Star Trek should have Archer serve under Aubrey for bit and learn from him. He needs to listen to Lucky Jack's advice to Mr. Hollom about leadership. He needs to be inspired by Jack's sassy defiance of the odds. That's what Star Trek needs: Jack Aubrey!