TIME goes" Pro Bible"

Christians have been voicing their surprise and delight over a recent cover story featured in one of the nation’s leading magazines that supports the teaching of the Bible in public school.

The author of last week’s Time magazine cover story, who favors the introduction of the Bible into classrooms, gave fresh hope that the Bible could really be included among public instruction.

“At first glance, you might think the wrong magazine had landed on the rack in the grocery store check-out line next to Newsweek and People magazine,” commented Chuck Colson during his radio talk show Breakpoint this week. “The cover features a picture of a black-and-yellow CliffsNotes version of the Bible. What is this, you think—the annual Easter-season bashing of Christians?

“But then you read the title of this cover story: ‘Why We Should Teach the Bible in Public School.’”

Propositions for teaching the Bible in schools have consistently been a hot topic, and many have strongly opposed it, noting a need for the separation of church and state. Yet, many Christian and non-Christians have argued that a non-biased look at the Bible is not only advantageous but also constitutional.

“Whoda thought? And this is from the same Time magazine that 40 years ago provocatively featured the cover story ‘Is God Dead?’!” expressed Jane Dratz, Project Coordinator at Dare2Share, on the youth ministry’s website. “Well, God is alive and well. And so is the Bible!”

Noting the major significance that the Bible has had in American and world culture, “The Case for Teaching the Bible,” written by Time magazine’s senior religion writer David Van Biema, explained that a background in religion is a helpful tool for people of today, because it has so many implications in today’s society; the Bible’s major impact should not be ignored.

“Simply put, the Bible is the most influential book ever written,” defended the writer in his piece. “Not only is the Bible the best-selling book of all time, it is the best-selling book of the year every year.”

At the beginning of his argument, Van Biema wrote about how teaching the Bible as an object of study and not the Word of God is within reason. According to some groups, students should be exposed to its teachings because “the Bible so pervades Western culture … that it’s hard to call anyone educated who hasn’t at least given thought to its key passages.”

The intention to teach scriptures in public institutions is also supported from a wide base of groups, some of which are non-Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and so on. Still, many groups are worried, however, that the book will not be looked at with neutrality. And others are worried that singling out Christian classes and not teaching it alongside other religions will promote Christianity instead.

Stephen Prothero, Boston University religion professor and author of Religious Literacy, does not believe that teaching the Bible in school is a bad idea, stating in the Time article, “I think the academic study of religion provides a kind of middle space between those two ways of talking. It takes the biblical truth claims seriously and yet brackets them for purposes of classroom discussion…. It works in a way that feels safe to both the believer and the unbeliever in the room.”

Van Biema noted that schools do not have to make the class mandatory, even creating alternative world religion classes to balance the studies. Public institutions can also do a test trial to see if it is successful.

In his article, the religion writer also made note of The Bible and Its Influence – written by Cullen Schippe, former vice president at Macmillan/McGraw-Hill, and Chuck Stetson, Founder and Chairman of the Bible Literacy Project – which has stirred up debates within and outside Christian circles.

Van Biema suggested the book be used as a companion textbook to public school Bible courses, describing it as largely non-biased.

Several Christians and non-Christians have disagreed with the use of this book, however, citing a number of reasons.

Secular challengers opposed to the textbook feel that it is still “written as if I am a Protestant Christian teaching Protestant Christians,” according to Jennifer Kendrick, one of the first Bible-literacy teachers in the nation, in the Time article.

They also argue that even if the book is impartial, the person that teaches it may not be.

Meanwhile, some Christians have also voiced disapproval of the book, including radio talk show co-host Nancy Manno of the In Great Company, who said it “uses the Bible to advance a secular humanist agenda and a one world, pluralistic religion.”

Despite all the controversy, Van Biema concludes his piece by again emphasizing the large impact of the Bible, and why it is a must read in America.

“Sure, there will be bumps along the way. But in the end, what is required in teaching about the Bible in our public schools is patriotism: a belief that we live in a nation that understands the wisdom of its Constitution clearly enough to allow the most important book in its history to remain vibrantly accessible for everyone.”

Car From `Knight Rider’ Is Up for Sale

KITT, the flame-throwing, river-jumping, talking muscle car from the ’80s TV show “Knight Rider” is up for sale.

Restored to its debut-season glory, the modified black 1982 Pontiac Trans Am is offered at $149,995 at a Dublin auto dealership. Johnny “Vette” Verhoek of Kassabian Motors has had the car, officially called Knight Industries Two Thousand, on display for about a month.

It is one of four documented “camera cars” used for close-up shots and scenes where David Hasselhoff, who played Michael Knight in the series, was behind the wheel.

Although it cannot achieve the 300 mph speeds that KITT reached, soar 50 feet in the air or throw smoke bombs, key features of the star car are intact. Perhaps most important, the red scanner light on the nose glows and makes a humming noise.

The car has two working video screens on the dashboard, and the cockpit features buttons that light up in green, yellow and red: ski mode, rocket boost, micro jam, silent mode, oil slick and eject.

Most of the buttons don’t do anything, Verhoek said. Nor can the car hold a conversation or drive itself.

KITT isn’t even street legal because of missing smog equipment and other modifications. Whoever buys the car will probably keep it in a private collection, or it may be purchased by a museum, Verhoek said.

The car belongs to Tim Russo of Livermore, a Kassabian customer who figured now was a good time to test the market, with the 25th anniversary of the show’s debut coming up.

Russo purchased the car 10 years ago at an auction in San Diego, and has spent the last decade finding parts to restore it.

Donald Trump Wins, Keeps His ‘Do Intact

DETROIT — One of the world’s most famous ‘do’s — considered by many to be a fashion don’t — remains intact after its owner, Donald Trump, prevailed in Sunday night’s “hair match” at Wrestlemania.

Trump trumped World Wrestling Entertainment owner Vince McMahon in the “Battle of the Billionaires” at the WWE’s largest annual pay-per-view event. After the real estate mogul and reality TV star triumphed, he gleefully took the shears to Mr. McMahon’s head.

Trump and McMahon didn’t actually battle it out in the ring, but instead had WWE wrestlers representing them grapple to see who would go bald. The winner, Trump’s guy Bobby Lashley, bested McMahon’s chosen wrestler, Umaga.

Trump wasn’t just a cheerleader during the match, however — he leaped off his feet at one point and drove McMahon into the ground, then pummeled him with some closed-fisted punches.

The “sports entertainment” event was held fittingly on April Fool’s Day and was filled with loud music, pyrotechnics and screeching, flashbulb-snapping fans.

Lashley’s pinfall victory over the 300-plus-pound “Samoan Bulldozer” meant that McMahon had to yield to Trump’s razor and the locks fell. Wrestling legend and action film actor “Stone Cold” Steve Austin served as the special guest referee for the match at Ford Field, home of the NFL’s Detroit Lions.

It wasn’t all laughs for Trump, though.

After celebrating in the ring with a cold beer — Austin’s preferred post-victory beverage — an unsuspecting Trump was given a “Stunner” by Austin — he had his head driven into Austin’s shoulder. Lashley tended to Trump while Austin jogged toward the dressing room to the roaring approval of the crowd.

The Trump-McMahon showdown was one of the featured matches at the 23rd edition of the professional wrestling extravaganza. It drew 80,103 fans, a new Ford Field record, breaking the previous record of 78,129 set during the December 2003 college BasketBowl between Michigan State and Kentucky.

ABC dumps Donny Osmond-hosted TV show

A new “reality” TV show hosted by onetime teen idol Donny Osmond, “The Great American Dream Vote,” has been dumped from ABC’s schedule after just two episodes proved to be a ratings nightmare.

The series, featuring contestants vying to have their life-long dreams fulfilled, ranked fifth in the major network pecking order for its time slot on Wednesday with a meager 4.5 million viewers tuning in.

Tuesday’s debut episode following the popular show “Dancing with the Stars” did somewhat better, averaging 5.9 million viewers, but still ranked only third in its hour.

By coincidence, news that Osmond’s latest ABC show was axed came as his sister and former TV co-host, Marie, announced that she was divorcing her husband of more than 20 years, music producer Brian Blosil.

The Walt Disney Co.-owned network did not say whether Osmond’s show was canceled altogether, but a spokeswoman said on Friday there were no plans to bring the series back.

The winner of the first episode was a bald man who received $30,000 worth of hair transplant surgery. The second night’s champion was a 43-year-old man who always wanted to play in the National Football League.

Edging out a woman whose dream was to launch a line of clothing for poodles, he was awarded a training camp stint with the San Francisco 49ers.

The misfire of “The Great American Dream Vote” comes days after Osmond, 49, said he and his siblings, who performed together in the 1970s as the Osmond Brothers, were planning a possible reunion TV special.

The Osmond Brothers scored a string of hits in the 1970s, including the breakthrough single “One Bad Apple,” and Donny, the group’s lead singer, went on to co-host a popular ABC variety show, “Donny and Marie,” with his younger sister.

Donny and Marie teamed up again in the late 1990s for a syndicated TV talk program, and Donny Osmond later hosted the syndicated TV game show “Pyramid.” He currently hosts a British version of that show.

Last year, he starred in Disney’s Broadway musical production of “Beauty and the Beast,” and the 55th album of his career, “Love Songs of the 70’s,” has gone gold in England.

Kitti Rocks

Check them out HERE.

I am too the father, I am ,I am I am I am….NOT!!!!

Anna Nicole’s Partner Drops DNA Appeal

Anna Nicole Smith’s partner dropped his bid Monday to block the release of DNA test results that could reveal the father of her baby daughter when it appeared a Bahamas court was going to reject his appeal.

An attorney for Howard K. Stern withdrew the challenge in the face of skeptical questioning by the three-judge Court of Appeal.

All three judges noted that Stern had filed his challenge too late and should have raised his objections before the Supreme Court ordered DNA testing in the paternity challenge filed by Larry Birkhead, a former boyfriend of Smith who claims to be the father of the infant, Dannielynn.

Justice Emmanuel E. Osadebay noted that Stern himself had agreed to DNA testing and waited until a week after the sample was taken to file the challenge.

Stern is listed on the birth certificate as the father of Dannielynn, who was born in the Bahamas in September. The child’s DNA was tested March 21 but the results have not been revealed.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hold a hearing in the paternity case but the lawyers and officials are prohibited by Bahamian legal rules from discussing the case, even to reveal the nature of the hearing.

The baby, whose full name is Dannielynn Hope Marshall Stern, could inherit millions from the estate of Smith’s late husband, J. Howard Marshall II. Smith had been fighting the Texas oil tycoon’s family over his estimated $500 million fortune since his death in 1995.

Test Screening Details On ‘The Simpsons’

Here’s more from that hush-hush Portland, Oregon, test screening of the hush-hush The Simpsons movie which is still a work-in-progress with only partial animation and in need of tweaks like Hans Zimmer’s score. Naturally, the attendees were forced to sign a multi-page nondisclosure agreement. Given all the secrecy, what does Fox think they have buried there: gold? Why, yes, box office gold! Who’s not gonna see this pic. And what summer blockbuster would be without a big sickening summer promotion. Right now, 7-11 and Fox are working on a deal to transform 11 of 4,700 stores across the U.S. to resemble the front of the Kwik-E-Marts selling some of Homer Simpson’s favorite snacks.

Inside every 7-11 will be a bonanza of Simpsons characters hawking the food. And all 7-11 customers will be able to buy products inspired by the show, including KrustyO’s cereal, Buzz Cola, and iced Squishees (the cup will say Squishee, but the contents will be Slurpee). But back to the test screening. My immense thanks to Shawn Levy of The Oregonian, whose source adds nice detail to the already posted brief write-up by a contributor to Ain’t It Cool News:

“A reliable informant sends the following: ‘I, too, attended the first public test screening last Tueday night at the Lloyd. Matt Groening sat four seats away from us, James L. Brooks and a plethora of writers sat behind us in two rows. It was good but very rough. Lots of animatics, both pencil drawings, and CG match moves and storyboards. Pretty enjoyable all around though and a pretty amazing screening experience, perhaps one of the best of my life thus far. It’s in the top five at least. Here are a few more details:

The film was about 90 minutes + some more.

It was very rough in places with CG animatics and match move models of characters and then pencil sketches. Some were just story boards.

The plot of the film is like a big episode, but kept pretty straightforward and linear. Not a ton of wacky digressions, but the focus is on the family first and foremost.

The first 45-50 minutes are pretty tightly written and cut, with a lot of well structured ‘A’ jokes followed up very quickly by the smaller ‘B’ joke.

At this point, the film is pretty well mapped out and plotted, but still very very malleable.

I would say the most work needs to be done near the last third of the film. It just feels a bit fast in how it wraps up, otherwise, it’s a solid piece of entertainment.

There were more than a few points where I had to remind myself that I was watching a movie, not just an episode and they even make a few jokes about this too.

The film is in Scope/2.35:1 and makes a joke about this in the first 3-4 minutes.’”

Ain’t It Cool News contributor Biker-Boy wrote earlier about the test screening:

The film in its current form is massively unfinished; with, I would guess, around 30% of the film in the final hi-def, super sharp animation. The rest was divided between hand drawn storyboards, and low res, choppy colour animation.

The voice soundtrack was complete, but the musical score wasn’t.

All this probably means that, even if unchanged, the final print will maintain its pacing, excitement and charm a little better than the version we saw, as 2 or 3 hand-drawn storyboards don’t quite manage to convey all of the things which makes The Simpsons so special.

We did get a pretty good idea of what to expect though, and where the film makers are going with this big screen version. So what did I, a Simpsons appreciator of long standing, think of the movie? It’s excellent. Is it mind blowingly awesome? No, not quite. Almost, but not quite. At least not in it’s current form.

The first thing to say is, it’s too short. I didn’t time it exactly, but the movie is something like an hour and a quarter in length. It’s over in a heartbeat.

Because (I would guess) of this short running time we come up against the first of the films little problems… Not nearly enough screen time is given to any one of the multitude of surrounding characters. Not one of them. We have the main Simpsons family taking centre stage, and a couple of new characters to be introduced to, but aside from that any of the other people who populate Springfield are reduced to one line (or at least sub-5 second) cameos. I feel they have wasted their best resource by simply omitting them. The trailer’s assertion that ‘the gangs all here’ is pretty misleading, since with a couple of exceptions (who get a few short minutes each) we don’t get to spend any time with any of the surrounding cast. It’s a crying shame.

The easiest way to describe the film is by way of it’s three acts. They roughly split up into; the first half hour, the second half hour, and the final quarter hour-ish of climax.

The first half hour of the Simpsons movie is hysterical genius. It’s classic. It’s old school. It’s violent. It’s slapstick. It’s clever. It’s everything you could ever want it to be. There’s a gag every couple of seconds (sometimes several going on in the background), and pretty much all of them hit the mark with confidence and accuracy. I haven’t laughed so hard in ages (definitely not since Hot Fuzz). Seriously. My head almost fell off.

It’s here we see scenes like Homer fixing his roof with Bart from the most recent trailer. It’s day-to-day life stuff, and is The Simpsons at it’s best.

The ‘plot’ of this first act reflects back to several classic episodes, and puts the family in situations that are familiar to all of us. Here we do, of course, meet all our favourite characters (albeit, as I said, too briefly), and get some marvellously funny set pieces. You might even say that the first act of The Simpsons movie is the Best. Episode. Ever. (sorry).

The second half hour is a problem. Here we are attempting to further the plot, and add some conflict and exposition. It’s not that it’s bad, just that it isn’t really as good. The gag rate drops right off, and (shockingly for such a short movie) it feels a little slow. There’s some good moments in there of course, but it just seems to lose it’s zap and it’s zing.

Here we could have done with branching off from the main story line and returning to perhaps some of the supporting characters for some laughs, some fun-poking, and some humour for humour’s sake. Padding if you will.

There is one stand out scene in this middle section which is utterly inspired, and where you get to see Bart at his comedy best.

The final short act, where the climax is played out, and everyone learns a valuable lesson, is exciting, clever and extremely satisfying. It definitely ends well, if a little abruptly. It all wraps up pretty neatly, and the animation here is superb, mixing high quality 2D and 3D to outstanding effect.

To ensure they get a brief mention, the voice acting is typically faultless, and the music was adequate – even though unfinished.

People keep asking me: “so is it any good, or is it just like a longer episode?”. I say, if you pick some of the truly classic episodes, then a longer version is exactly what we wanted. What we got feels like they weren’t quite sure how to create a 90-minute episode, so they did one episode for comedy, one for plot, and one for the ending. I say we got three episodes back to back, and they all feel slightly different.

None of this of course means that the movie is bad. It isn’t. It’s The Simpsons. It’s funny, charming, exciting, familiar and is peppered with delightfully loving references to all our favourite events in the Simpsons family history (one in particular will have you whooping with joy in your seat if you’re a Simpsons fan).

I’d recommend the movie, yes – in its current state, to anyone who enjoys watching the show, and anyone who enjoys a laugh in general. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and am looking forward to seeing it again.

I just hope, somewhere in the back of my mind, that they read and pay attention to my comment card, and fill out the middle section with some more snap, crackle and pop. If they do, they could have an all time classic on their hands, which sadly the version I saw falls ever so slightly short of.”

Joint Promotion Adds Stickers to Sweet Smell of Marketing

A PROMOTION scheduled to begin today may prompt hotel guests to exclaim, with apologies to “Apocalypse Now,” that they love the smell of advertising in the morning.

Guests at Omni luxury hotels will find small scented stickers on the front pages of their free copies of USA Today. A blackberry aroma will suggest that the guests start the day at their hotels with a cup of Starbucks coffee “paired with a fresh muffin.” The promotion, to be tested for at least six months, is being sponsored by Omni Hotels and Starbucks Coffee.

It is one of two ideas being explored by the Gannett Company, the parent of USA Today, in the increasingly popular realm of scented advertising. The other concept Gannett is testing is to let marketers add scents to the ads they run in the pages of USA Today. Another national newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, owned by Dow Jones & Company, is also looking into scenting its ad pages.

Scented selling, part of a trend known as sensory marketing, is gaining favor because it helps brands stand out in crowded, competitive categories.

For example, visitors to the lobbies of Omni hotels can smell blends of lemongrass and green tea, which since late 2005 has been the official scent of the lodging chain.

“We’re looking for a way to carry the scents, the whole sensory experience, further,” said Caryn Kboudi, vice president for corporate communications at Omni Hotels in Irving, Tex.

•

Other sensory-marketing tactics at the 38 Omni hotels, which are intended to help “create a more memorable stay,” Ms. Kboudi said, include Sensation Bars, redesigned room minibars stocked with items like mojito-flavored jelly beans and miniature Zen gardens; elaborate floral displays in public spaces; and “Sensational Wednesdays,” offering gifts for guests like eucalyptus bath salts. There are even chimes that play softly when computer users visit the corporate Web site (www.omnihotels.com). “Omni is one of the brands getting aggressive about sensory marketing,” said Michael Davidson, vice president for national circulation sales at USA Today in McLean, Va., which made Omni executives “excited to try this.”

USA Today and Omni worked together about six months to try various types of stickers, Mr. Davidson said, making their way through the estimated 160 scents available from the sticker maker, the WS Packaging Group in Algoma, Wis.

Ms. Kboudi recalled evaluating “at least 50” aromas, she said, “sniffing a lot of little Baggies with scent stickers inside.”

After executives at Starbucks were invited to weigh in, the verdict was that “we all gravitated to the berry scent,” she added, because it “made you go ‘yum yum’ and had a very fresh scent.” (The smell of Starbucks coffee was deemed too difficult to duplicate.)

The stickers are composed of two layers and measure 2 inches long by 1 inch wide. They replace the single-ply stickers affixed to the front pages of USA Today, informing the guests the newspapers are courtesy of Omni Hotels. The chain distributes 10,000 to 13,000 copies a day of USA Today, Mr. Davidson estimated.

The stickers are of the “peel and sniff” variety in that the berry scents are not supposed to be released until the top layers are lifted. That is intended to minimize complaints from allergic — or berry-allergic — hotel guests.

Scented ads, like any sensory experience, have generated their share of protests. Ads in magazines featuring scent strips, for products like fragrances, draw the ire of readers who believe the smells are unpleasant or too powerful.

As a result, publishers like the Time Inc. unit of Time Warner, which owns magazines like InStyle, People and Real Simple, adopted a policy by which readers can request scent-free issues from customer service representatives.

And in December, the California Milk Processor Board ran afoul of scent-sensitive commuters when it asked that adhesive strips smelling like chocolate chip cookies be affixed to five bus shelters in San Francisco.

Gripes about the aroma from the ads, part of the “Got milk?” campaign, led the local Municipal Transportation Authority to order CBS Outdoor, which maintains the bus shelters, to remove the scent strips.

•

Such troubles may lead some consumers to conclude that ads in general are good only for wrapping fish. For them, help has arrived.

To promote the series “Deadliest Catch,” which will begin its third season tomorrow night, the Discovery Channel cable network is providing branded wrappers to 12 fish markets in Boston, San Francisco and Seattle.

The estimated 185,000 feet of wrapping paper, enough for more than 100,000 seafood orders, tells shoppers they can now watch “fresh episodes” of the series, which follows crab fisherman in the Bering Sea.

The promotion, which began last week, is to continue through April “or until we run out of paper,” said Julie Gordon Willis, senior vice president for marketing at Discovery Channel in Silver Spring, Md., part of Discovery Communications.

The promotion was developed by PHD, a media agency owned by the Omnicom Group, and produced by Metropolis Media, part of Ubiquitous Media in New York.

Hmm. Perhaps the two promotions can be paired, encouraging those who read newspapers online to buy the printed versions because fish cannot be wrapped in computers.

Jihad to Go There

Remember Hogan’s Heroes? Many objected to that sitcom on the grounds that it trivialized the horrors of the Nazis. Now there’s Jihad to Be There, soon to debut on the brand-new Terror Channel. Programming exec Rex Van Ommeran describes it as a “madcap romp through a terrorist training camp.”