Flawed Leadership

I mess up all the time. I'm human after all. The question is will I seek forgiveness and relief from the consequences of my mistakes or will I seek true repentance? Alleviation from guilt is much different than embracing the consequences and seeking an attitude and thought change. Who will I choose to be?

Ponderings from the Week

Over the last two week with round after round of talking with perspective employers, I am confident in saying that I’m beat. I’ve had good conversations, alright conversations, and the occasional horribly awkward ones. Behind each progressive conversation there has always been an undertone of superficiality. What can I say to have them hire me? How do I best accentuate my skills and talents? Even the great conversations I’ve had have been tainted with a sense of evaluation and judgment from both ends.

After a week of living in such a mind set, it is easy to carry that attitude into all aspects of my life. There is this constant evaluation of other people. We begin to compare our qualities and worth to the resume of the person next to us. Are we smarter than them? More popular? Better looking? Earn more money? I mean isn’t this the way society assigns worth to someone? By the contributions they can make to society.

I believe that we all have intrinsic worth, that our value is not evaluated by how much we can contribute to God’s kingdom. Nonetheless, I also believe that God did not endow everyone with the same means or ability. And, further more, our performances are evaluated by our utilization of these skills, abilities, and resources. Unfortunately, so much of the time, the people who are blessed the most, perform the worst. Sure, they make the money, develop the technology, and receive much accolade, but how have they used their resources for God’s kingdom? That’s where I stand at this point in time. Just like the last few days, I’m wandering around from booth to booth trying to figure where I am going to focus my energy and talent. Will I choose to invest God’s talents or spend them for my own life? Sometimes in the drowning noise of this world, God’s still voice is hard to hear. We really have to listen intently and intentionally if we ever hope to live by God’s way and not our own.

God has already blessed me with a college education, money in my pocket, good health, and many good friends. I only pray and hope that at the end of my life, I will have something to show God for what he has so graciously and lovingly blessed me with. This is the desire of my heart. We certainly don’t earn God’s love. God freely invests his love in our lives so that it may increase and be generously shared through our obedient surrender. May glory be to God forever and ever.

Two Observations on Relationships

So, I have been thinking about relationships recently. Actually, I have thought about relationships for over three years now. Especially now, however, as I have approached the beginning of the rest of my life. You start thinking about the person you will spend that time with. God has certainly kept me too busy to really worry too much about romantic interest. Nonetheless, through the instances where I have had to encounter issues surrounding my emotions and desires, God has certainly taught me much (and I still have a lot to learn).I was raised with a lot of blinders on as a child. My parents never talked about “those things” when I was a child and I focused intently on my studies. I certainly do not claim to be an expert on relationships. However, I’ve come up with my two observations on relationships:

1) We do not take relationships seriously enough.
I firmly hold to the belief that the end product of dating is marriage. Many people do not realize that the emotion, spiritual, and physical connections we form slowly binds our hearts together. Even the bonds we form with family and friends, through sharing our struggles and triumphs, connect us all to the collective vine. The connection between a husband and wife really, when we look at it, models the deeply intimate connection between Christ and his people. Many of us long for that deep intimacy. We long for the intended intimacy with a seemingly disconnected God, and the intimacy from a partner helps us tangibly fulfill these deeply ingrained needs. Dating, as well as any relationship for that matter, should be handled with the similar seriousness of pursuing our relationship with God.

2) We take relationships too seriously.
The problem with relationships is that they involve people. People sin, we sin. If our sole means for fulfilling our inborn desires for intimacy, love, and purpose is based on finding the right one, we are bound to be disappointed. God will provide for our needs and he will provide us with a spouse. God has been teaching me to slowly trust in him more and more with every aspect of my life. We are tempted to enter into a relationship before we even know who God is, who we are, and where our lives are going. Let us fall in love with Jesus before we fall in love with anyone else.

What has definitely helped me sort through the misty waters of dating is being able to sort through the fog with friends. As our community becomes tighter, attractions are bound to emerge. We are afraid, however, to seriously discuss such a vital aspect of our lives. God has blessed us with a desire to share our lives with another and I truly believe he longs to fulfill our God-given desires. Let us first approach the author of our lives before we begin to write the story of our lives with someone else. And as we journey along with someone, my God continue to redeem and glorify himself through our inadequacies and failures.

Flowering Plants

Haven't posted in an eternity. No one probably reads this at all (or ever did). But here goes:

So last semester I bought a nicely flowering plant during the autumn season. I thought the cute little orange flowers would bring some life into our otherwise musty dorm room. After a few days of accentuating the room, the flowers started to wither. What was I doing wrong? Were the living conditions of our room in that much of squalor? I tried watering the plant; I placed the plant by the window (but not too close for fear of freezing its fragile green leaves); I even used my desk lamp to provide extra tender loving care for my beloved plant. No, I did not name the thing if that was what you were thinking. Anyways, the flowers eventually withered and fell off. My efforts to nurture the plant were for none and what was left was a shrubby tuft of leaves. I failed; I acknowledged defeat and stopped watering the plant.

Nonetheless, after a month or so of neglect, my roommate notices the shriveled, yellowing plant on the television. Some leaves were dried out; others were on the verge of falling off. “Sam, you got to water that thing. It’s still alive.” Then it struck me. Even though the flowers had come off, the plant was still a living organism which required tender loving care. Maybe the flowers were supposed to fall off. After all, plants in the wild have seasons of flowering and seasons of hibernation. Then it hit me again. How often do we only care about something if it serves our means and purposes, but once they are no longer useful to us, we consider them garbage? I only cared about the plant with its beautiful flowers. I was willing to love and care for the plant in order to exploit the beauty of the wonderful orange blossoms. However, once they were gone, I left the plant withering on the television.

Not only do I view and treat others this way, I realized that so many times we treat ourselves in a very similar way. We tell ourselves, “I’m not growing or God is not working because I cannot see the flowers.” Well, wake up and smell the roses, Doris. There are seasons when we bare fruit. However, the rest of the time, the gardener (i.e. God) is pruning our lives, watering us, nurturing us until the time is right. I’m thankful that we have a God who is beyond generous in his patience and diligence in growing his flowers.

Private and Public Faith

So my brother got confirmed today, and his proclamation of Christianity reminded me of the intriguing dynamics involved with the Christian faith. In one aspect, being Christian is a very personal matter. Faith is about having a personal interaction, dependence, and relationship with God. Every Christian has their unique testimony and their unique encounters with this very personal Jesus. In fact, I would go as far as to say that every Christian has their own unique view on who exactly God is.

However, as my brother went before the entire congregation proclaiming his faith along with the eight other candidates, God reminded me of the very communal nature of Christianity. Our faith is not only about understanding God in a very deep and personal way, but also about connecting with an extensive and immense community of believers. You see, my bother was not only affirming a profound faith in a God who has personally touched him and making a commitment to pursue Jesus wholeheartedly, he was also proclaiming his commitment to the community. That is one unique and mysterious aspect of this Christian faith, the notion of unity through diversity, the fact that people with different cultures and backgrounds are unified with a common vision, hope, and the fact that God has encountered their lives in a profound way. Like the parable of the lost sheep, God not only draws us to himself, he also draws the sheep back among the other 99. When we under go these types of public declarations, we enter into a serious contract and commitment to the faith we hold and the community we are a part of.

This public ceremony is a two way exchange of the person publicly committing to God and God publicly committing to this person. The community also becomes unified with this new member. The community now has the responsibility to encourage, love, and rebuke in order to help this member fulfill his/her commitments.

I believe that our words carry much weight and to violate such public and life-altering promises and vows is not only a violation of our credibility but a mark on a God who always remains faithful to his words. Christianity, in my opinion, has a large basis on notion of keeping one's word. We constantly find mentions of promises, covenants, and contracts throughout God's interaction with mankind. The major foundation of the church sits on the solid foundation of God's infallible words. If God's words were not reliable, then we would not really have anything else. So as we live out our commitments to God, we should not forget our responsibilities to God and our obligations to the community.

The Verdict

(AP) WASHINGTON A judge ruled Monday in favor of a dry cleaner that was sued for $54 million over a missing pair of pants.

The owners of Custom Cleaners did not violate the city’s Consumer Protection Act by failing to live up to Roy L. Pearson’s expectations of the “Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign that was once placed in the store window, District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled.

Bartnoff ordered Pearson to pay the court costs of defendants Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung.

'Nuff said.

Just the Right Night

Tonight was just the right evening. You know when the air lazily hangs in the air and the setting sun paints the sky a beautiful violet. The bugs are chirping in the distance and the air has a certain quality to it. Remember the carefree summer evenings laying out on the lawn sucking down Popsicles without anything to think about other than the immediate moment? That was what tonight felt like. Tonight felt like the essence of summer, the essence of childhood. Are we ever afforded the luxury to feel this unburdened by the pressures of life? Has that time passed into fading memory like past summers of long ago? I think that sometimes, we have to rest in the peace of God's care and be as children again. Life passes too quickly. Let's learn to enjoy it, before the summer days disappear.

Dragon Boat Festival

After a disappointing loss in the first round, we rallied to win the second race. I am so proud of the NCTU Dragon Boat Racing Team. Nice job, everyone. Unfortunately, we were prematurely eliminated the next day. Better luck next year!

Regrading 54 Million Dollar Pants: Part II

Day two.

Reporter's Notebook: Day 2 of The Case of the $54 million Pants

By Griff Jenkins

WASHINGTON — Day two of the case of the $54 million pants opened much in the same fashion as the trial had begun, with plaintiff Roy Pearson needling specific statutes and interpretations of them, prompting more wasted hours of clarification-seeking from Judge Judy Bartnoff.

On the second day, I wore an equally outrageous pair of Lily Pulitzer pants as on Tuesday's court date, and I had a better seat —- in the jury box, just feet away from the action.

When Judge Bartnoff came in the courtroom, she caught a glimpse of my pants and smiled. But soon after, Pearson began going back to issues from day one, namely his divorce case, and Judge Bartnoff took charge, dismissing Pearson's effort to re-try his divorce settlement.

Pearson's remaining issues over evidence and "settlement demands" prompted Judge Bartnoff at one point to say, "I don't know what we're doing at this point ... I thought we were talking about evidence?"

After a short break, the cross-examination of Pearson by defense attorney Chris Manning began. Manning proceeded to force Pearson to address his bitter divorce, his financial woes and his first encounter with the Chungs in 2002 which resulted in a compensation check of $150, which Pearson had demanded.

Manning asked Pearson if it made him mad when the dry cleaners lost his pants and Pearson said, "No," adding, "My temperament, generally, is I don't get angry."

That shocked most everyone in the room considering the guy is seeking $54 million in retribution in this case.

The real crux of the cross-examination came when Manning began trying to illicit Pearson's definition of what is a "reasonable" interpretation of a sign that reads: "Satisfaction Guaranteed"

Manning asked directly, "Is it reasonable to sue someone for upwards of $67 million?" And after several attempts at waffling, Pearson finally answered, "Yes."

A window into Pearson's aggressive pursuit of the pants in 2005 came when Manning confirmed with the witness that Pearson had sent a letter to the Chungs demanding $1,150 compensation (despite the Chungs producing the pants that matched the receipt) or else he would "sue them for not less that $50,000."

Nonetheless, Pearson maintained throughout the cross that he was entitled to "unconditional satisfaction" under the Washington, D.C.'s Consumer Protection Act.

After the cross, the plaintiff rested at which point Manning immediately requested a ruling asking for a "move for judgment as a matter of law on all claims."

Judge Bartnoff made a partial ruling denying Pearson's claims with regard to the one sign that read "Same Day Service." Bartnoff cited a lack of evidence and told Pearson the sign simply meant same day service was an available service at the cleaners — not a guaranteed service every time — particularly when not requested, as in Pearson's case.

Judge Bartnoff ended her ruling by telling Pearson, "you're simply reading things into it that just aren't there."

But in the matter of the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign and the dispute over whether the pants produced were or were not Pearson's, no closure was reached and the room broke for lunch.

After the break, Manning began his defense calling just three witnesses: a community activist who testified favorably on the contributions of the Chungs to the community; a customer of the cleaners who believed that the Chungs provided "very good service" and said his interpretation of "Satisfaction Guaranteed" meant if the Chungs couldn't resolve a problem then they should compensate the customer for the cost of the clothing item "and nothing more." The final witness was the co-owner of Custom Dry Cleaners, Soo Chung.

Mrs. Chung became very emotional and broke down sobbing during her testimony when Manning began to ask about the toll that the case has taken on her business and her life. Judge Bartnoff called for another break, and when the testimony began again, Soo Chung once again began crying, though she was able to answer that she had suffered "economically, emotionally and healthwise too."

It's worth noting that the drama was heightened some by the mere fact that the testimony was done through a Korean translator as Mrs. Chung does not speak fluent English. But in the end, Pearson at least had the good sense not to cross examine her.

Closing arguments got a bit heated between Judge Bartnoff and Pearson when things delved into an argument over what Pearson was entitled to in terms of statutory and punitive damages. I'm no lawyer, but I was a little surprised that rather than making a sort of coherent and impassioned plea for his case, Pearson continued citing statutes and cases that proved his claims under the Consumer Protection Act.

Manning's closing argument was quite different. He painted Pearson as "one man who ruthlessly abused the legal system" and caused enormous harm to his clients. He cited Pearson's divorce, financial status, history of litigiousness and a "wrath against the Chungs" since 2002. He ended his closing argument saying it is time to "support the idea of common sense... and wake up from the American nightmare created by Roy Pearson."

When it was over, Judge Bartnoff chose not to issue a ruling from the bench but said a ruling can be expected by the end of the week. The decision didn't exactly surprise me since Pearson has proved that he is a stickler for technical details, or perhaps Judge Bartnoff just wanted plenty of time to ensure the accuracy of her ruling.

At the press conference with the Chungs immediately following, Manning said he was "extraordinarily happy with how the trial went" in what he described as an "incredibly frivolous lawsuit."

Pearson again chose to ignore the media

Original link: FOXnews.com

Regarding 54 Million Dollar Pants

The saga continues. Here is a account by Fox New's Griff Jenkins of the first day of the trial. Enjoy.

Reporter's Notebook: The Case of the $54 million Pants

by Griff Jenkins

WASHINGTON — The case of the $54 million pants suit began Tuesday as standing room only in the circus that was Judge Judith Bartnoff’s courtroom 415 at D.C. Superior Court — a room filled mostly with media and Korean supporters of defendants Jin and Soo Chung and their son, Ki.

The plaintiff, Judge Roy Pearson dropped his original claim of $67 million because he chose to withdraw the claim of the actual loss of the pants, which were eventually found in the Chung's dry cleaning store, and focus on what he says are fraudulent signs in the store that read "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."

The first 45 minutes of the trial were strangely devoted to Judge Bartnoff seeking clarification of Judge Pearson’s withdrawal of the lost pants claims and determining what exactly the case was really about — the false advertising citied under D.C.’s Consumer Protection Act.

Once that ended and opening statements began, defense attorney Chris Manning said this was "a simple case about people."

Manning suggested that because of Pearson’s unpleasant divorce in 2003, his financial hardships and his attempt to seek revenge on the Chungs for losing his pants, this case had become a "perfect legal storm."

Manning summed up the opening statement with this quote: "This is a terrible example of American litigiousness." Manning also noted that this case comes down now to what a "reasonable person" would interpret "satisfaction guaranteed" to mean.

Pearson, who represented himself, proceeded to call some eight witnesses that included his 38-year-old son and some members of the community who had had bad experiences with Custom Dry Cleaners, including an 89-year-old woman in a wheelchair who drifted at times into her service in the Kennedy-Johnson administration.

This witness, Dr. Grace Hewell, was certainly entertaining when she noted that she was "chased" out of the store by Mr. Chung, which she then slid into comparing to "surviving the Nazis" while she was stationed in Germany in World War II.

It’s worth noting, though, that in the cross-examination of most of the witnesses, they were willing to admit that they "would have been satisfied" if they had gotten simple compensation from the Chungs for the loss or ruined pieces of clothing.

Pearson also called his salesman at Nordstrom’s to testify about the value of his Hickey Freeman suits as well as a member of his own Office of Administrative Hearings, who testified that Pearson "had no social life" and worked on his case on the weekends rather than going camping in West Virginia with the witness.

When Pearson testified as himself — a narrative that lasted for more than an hour — he broke down and cried and asked for a recess. The breakdown occurred right after he described being told that the Chungs "did not have his pants" that he so desperately needed to start his new job as a judge in 2005.

After his long-winded testimony, Pearson attempted to admit evidence — much of which was not permitted. This exercise took another hour.

The trial ended without a cross-examination of Pearson by Manning. That activity opens Wednesday's session and will be followed by the defense's calling of witnesses.

This reporter's sense is that Judge Bartnoff is becoming increasingly impatient with Pearson’s lack of evidence and illegitimate claims to personal injury. Not many in the audience appeared to have much sympathy for Pearson's teary-eyed moment.

After the trial ended, I rode the elevator down with the Chungs and I asked Mr. Chung how he was doing. He told me quietly, "I’m doing fine." Manning said they were "confident" that after the second day of testimony, the Chungs will prevail.

My attempt to speak with Judge Pearson, cameras in tow and me in my floral Lily Pulitzer pants, was greeted with a simple statement: "You’re being rude!"

As I wrapped up the day's events on air with The Big Story's John Gibson, a freak thunderstorm befell the city, and I noted the thunder, rain and lighting by saying, "I don’t know, John, but judging from the act of God in the background, perhaps even He is upset with this frivolous lawsuit."

Some other color to note — a man in a seersucker suit from the American Tort Reform Association handed out green buttons with a picture of pants on them that read: "$65 Million Pantsuit Perverts D.C.’s Consumer Protection Law."

The case starts up again Wednesday morning and I’ll be there to find out what the defense has to say.

Original link: FOXnews.com