Mothers

Very early this morning, my mom dragged her suitcase down the narrow flight of stairs in our building and out into the crisp Brooklyn streets. Over the last eleven days, she cooked and cleaned for us, held Evangeline so I could shower occasionally, talked with us, prayed for us, and generally strewed her love all about the burrow. I miss her.

She shocked us when she bought her ticket from Phoenix to New York while I was still in labor, and traveled across the country to arrive here just hours after the birth. I'm glad she did because I don't know how I could have made it through last week without her.

One afternoon last week, as I cradled my new daughter and tried to memorize the little curves of her face, I contemplated this undertaking called motherhood. Here was a new life that needed nurturing from Mr. Miller and me for the next eighteen or twenty years. Then I looked up and saw my mom on the Internet furiously researching a baby question for me. I thought about her trip. This trip wasn't a vacation, even though she was in a famous vacation destination. Instead, she was passing the hours caring for me in the most basic ways--providing food, a clean home, and even holding me when I cried. I wasn't that different from Evangeline (aside from the fact that I can form complete sentences). So while my mom birthed me over twenty-six years ago, she's still caring for me.

It dawned on me for the first time that mothering isn't simply a season of life; it's a life-long commitment. That fact is both intimidating and exciting. How does one really contemplate much less prepare for a task that enormous in import? By prayer, yes? And by seeking the Lord's wisdom for each day, not worrying about tomorrow? Perhaps, then, by God's grace and in his providence, I may find myself some twenty-plus years from now caring for Evangeline after she gives birth to her first child, just as my mom cared for me this week.


Oma & Evangeline

Early education

Today, my husband and Evangeline listened to Rush Limbaugh while she ate. He's making sure that her political socialization starts early and with the right sources.

Eating and going out

Today, Evangeline made her first trip out into the great wide world. The purpose? A pediatrician visit. Our pediatrician is located a short walk away in Brooklyn Heights. The doctor was very gentle with her, and said that Evangeline's health is generally quite good. Her only worry at this point is Evangeline's low weight (she's in the 15 percentile). However, we're pretty sure her low weight is due to the trouble I had breastfeeding last week. Though she has a strong suck, Evangeline was never able to connect sucking with feeding even with the help of a lactation consultant. After many tears as I worked through feelings of guilt and loss, we finally moved her to formula on Sunday. She's been eating much better and, Lord willing, will gain weight rapidly. While my preference is to breastfeed because of the numerous health benefits to the baby, the most important thing is to get our girl fed and growing.

Baby on an Ottoman

Evangeline Up Close

Baby and Daddy

More Cuteness

Helping out with the Baby

While the Mrs. and I live very far from our respective hometowns, our families have already been able to help with Evangeline. Less than a half-hour after the midwife left, my brother Paul brought some lovely roses and a meal prepared by our caregroup leader's wife, Lulu. He then ran some errands for us so I didn't have to.

Then Mrs. Miller's sister and mother joined us. Evie, who had been sightseeing in New York this weekend, postponed her return to D.C. so that she could help us for the day. And Evangeline's Oma flew across the country to lend a hand. In the picture you can see how all four lovely ladies spent the morning. Evie and Oma did a Target run for us as well!

The Vitals

Evangeline Pau MillerBorn: 11:15 am, January 20, 2008

Weight: 7 lb, 6 oz.

Length: 20 1/2"

Back to school...

...but it ain't no grindstone.

First, Mr. Miller only goes to school on Mondays and Wednesdays. Here's to uber long weekends with the wife and new baby! He is also excited about all that time with a laptop and early primary results.

Second, his class line-up, to use the colloquialism, rocks.

• Game Theory - a class for economic nerds to go crazy analyzing real-life criminal and civil litigation. Think: the Prisoner's Dilemma. Plus, Mr. Miller already took this seminar in undergrad.
• International Law - Mr. Miller channels John Bolton (maybe even grows a mustache), hangs with UN exchange students, and listens to the professor extol international "law," which he believes is fiction. One gem from the first day: professor laughs at presidential candidate Mike Huckabee holding a position on the Law of the Sea Treaty because "he's from a land-locked state." New York snobbery at its best.
  
• Criminal Adjudication - covering Constitutional issues from "bail to jail."
• Advanced Constitutional Law: Religions Liberty - Mr. Miller discusses the treatment of the Religion Clauses of the U.S. Constitution by the Supreme Court for the last two hundred years with brilliant scholar, Philip Hamburger.
  
• Supreme Court Litigation and Religious Minorities - Mr. Miller discusses the same cases as above with Nat Lewin (of Kiryas Joel fame) and visits the Supreme Court in February to hear oral arguments and spend some quality time with Justice Scalia.

Not bad. Not bad at all.

Reading My Grandfather’s Son

[Originally published in the Blackstone Fellowship Review, January 2008]

To those of you who will only skim the first paragraph of this review, I offer Bill Kristol's headline admonition, "Read this book." To the rest of you, read this book. You'll meet the Clarence Thomas you never knew.

If you polled a group of today's conservative law students on their favorite Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas would likely be overlooked. This fact shouldn't surprise us. We were involved in the legal culture when Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito were appointed. We watched their confirmation hearings and learned all kinds of information about their personal lives, careers, and lower court opinions. Chief Justice Rehnquist defined the direction of the Court for a number of years, and thus receives attention in most Constitutional law courses. And, of course, Justice Scalia is nothing less than a celebrity. His witty opinions and dissents alike drive liberal law professors crazy, providing conservative law students moments of elation in an otherwise dismal classroom.

Clarence Thomas, on the other hand, is a retiring personality and, as a writer, famously concise or even silent. Recall his terse dissent in Lawrence, or his unusual habit of not asking questions during oral arguments. And very few of this century's law students have any real recollection of his confirmation. I have a grainy memory of my parents watching a public broadcast of Thomas' famous speech to the Senate Judiciary Committee rebutting Anita Hill's claims, but I did not know who Anita Hill was and did not care to know. My first significant memory of Justice Thomas was hearing one of my college professor's describe him as an "Oreo" during an argument in the elevator as to whether a black person could ever be politically conservative.

In one way, the memoir reflects this laconic Clarence Thomas. The volume is slim and non-pretentious. Unlike the biographies of many public figures, the text is sparse on important names and dates. But, like Thomas' legal opinions, the book bowls you over with its stunning facts recounted in his characteristic tight, careful style.

And the facts are stunning.

A descendant of West African slaves, Thomas was born in a shanty sans bathroom and lit by a sole light bulb in rural Georgia. He did not meet his father until age nine, and did not see him again until after high school. In other words, Thomas should have been a statistic. But after one winter without regular meals, his mother turned him over to the exclusive care of his grandfather—a severe, strict man with a third-grade education.

His grandfather, who Thomas called, “Daddy,” made the difference in his life. Daddy sent him to parochial schools, pushed him academically, took him to work the family farm in the summer in order to keep him out of trouble in Savanna, and taught him the importance of hard, honest work. Thomas tells of one incident on the farm where he complained at the rigorous sun-up-to-sun-down work regime, which Daddy said was man’s lot in life because of the Fall. Thomas quipped that slavery was over. Daddy responded, “Not in my house.”

For being such an important figure in Thomas’ formation, Daddy was not a picture of affectionate paternalism. He never hugged Thomas nor offered him an encouraging word. Furthermore, the two men were estranged to some degree for a quarter of a century because of Thomas decision to leave seminary and his foray into Black Power politics. Yet it is to this man that Thomas most attributes his professional success. Indeed, Thomas confesses that he later came to understand that, “I had been raised by the greatest man I have ever known.”

The other main theme in Thomas story is race. Racial slurs and slights peppered his childhood at parochial school and later in seminary and college. Reading them provokes one to indignation and helps the reader understand his slide, as young man, toward bitterness at white culture and hatred of America. Daddy’s voice persisted even in that season, however, reminding Thomas that to change the world, he needed to change himself; and, though justified in his outrage over the lives of many blacks in America, Thomas’ rage was paralyzing rather than permitting him to face the opportunities he had been given.

Thomas came to understand his grandfather’s wisdom, and that insight gives the remainder of his story it’s extraordinary depth. Although racism continued to impact his time at law school, his post-law school job hunt, and even his confirmation hearings, which he famously described as nothing more than a “high-tech lynching,” he resisted the temptation toward anger and, instead, grew increasingly interested in discovering real policy solutions to the plight of black Americans.

Only in the last third of the book does Thomas sketch his journey to the bench. It is a fascinating read. He parades plenty of familiar faces (including a young Mike Luttig) and insider information on the confirmation process to keep the legal history junkies happy as well as catch up those of us who have little memory of that point in history. Plus, he tells the Anita Hill incident from his perspective, which you certainly will not find anywhere else.

But most striking to me was the role of prayer and faith in carrying him through the process. Moments before his famous speech to the Senate, he prayed with his wife and Senator Danforth, who had shepherded his nomination process through the Senate. Then, as he faced the committee, he prayed again, “Let the Holy Ghost speak through me.” That moment, more than any other, illustrates Justice Thomas’ great reverence for words.

Indeed, Clarence Thomas' signal greatness is his respect for the power of the word. It is upon this principle that he has built his Supreme Court legacy of clearly articulating the law. And by this precept he crafted not only a fine autobiography, but, perhaps, a great book.

Ready!

I'm full-term (37 weeks), which means Evangeline could join us any day!

Mr. Miller reminds me from across the room that most women don't deliver their first baby early. Sad.

Sundays

My favorite day of the week is Sunday. The alarm clock wakes us up at 8 AM. We both rush to get ready and leave the house by 8:20. We walk two miles to church. Mr. Miller practices with the worship team for a couple hours, before the service starts at 11. He plays bass, and recently has had the opportunity to sing as well. I, meanwhile, have a quiet time in the auditorium and join a small group of people from church for prayer at 10:15. [Amendment: in December, I started accidentally napping under my coat in the auditorium between our morning walk and the service so we decided it was better for me to just sleep at home and walk to church later by myself.]

After worshiping the Lord through song, being fed the Word, and catching up with our friends, we walk home. That conversation is the best of the week because we talk about the sermon!!! Without fail, much spiritual growth happens on that walk. Once we get home, we eat a big lunch, turn the radio to some game, and take a nap. Eventually, we drag ourselves back into the world of the living to read books, listen to game(s), and talk.

I wonder how Evangeline's arrival will change our Sabbath routine...

The Cloisters

There's a castle on a hill overlooking the Hudson River on the northeast tip of Manhattan. Known as "the Cloisters," it is the branch of the massive Metropolitan Museum of Art that houses the medieval art collection. It's called the Cloisters because

the building incorporates elements from five medieval French cloisters—quadrangles enclosed by a roofed or vaulted passageway, or arcade—and from other monastic sites in southern France. Three of the cloisters reconstructed at the branch museum feature gardens planted according to horticultural information found in medieval treatises and poetry, garden documents and herbals, and medieval works of art, such as tapestries, stained-glass windows, and column capitals. Approximately five thousand works of art from medieval Europe, dating from about A.D. 800 with particular emphasis on the twelfth through fifteenth century, are exhibited in this unique and sympathetic context. more here

Mr. Miller and I wandered the cool halls, chapels and quadrangles last Thursday. Because of the season, the gardens were uninspiring, but the largely Christian-themed artwork spurred numerous conversations and the architecture stunned us.

Christmas Wrap-up

It appears I have a problem making timely holiday posts. Nonetheless, I still want to post a bit about our Christmas for the record and in the interest of my family, who are curious about such things.

Preparations :: While we did not have a tree this year, we did decorate the apartment a bit, burn scented candles, listen to Christmas music, and bake/consume tons of cookies (peanut butter blossoms, coconut macaroons, and gingersnaps to name a few).

Christmas Eve :: We ate chili (Keith's favorite recipe) and cornbread, carrying on my mom's tradition. Sadly, we did not plan ahead to attend a Christmas Eve service, which I hope to change in the future.

Christmas Day :: Again following my mom's lead, I served Pineapple Walnut Muffins, sausage balls, and coffee for breakfast. We actually ate it in bed while opening gifts. I suppose in the future we'll probably gather around a tree, but this was a romantic substitute, fitting for our first Christmas as a married couple. We were delighted by the gifts and notes showered upon us by our family. Even Evangeline, though still in utero, received some, including a fuzzy pink receiving blanket from Keziah, crocheted booties from Aunt Evie, a teddy bear from Aunt Annie, and a silver rattle from her Oma and Opa. [Note: my parents bought the rattle two years ago for my first baby before Mr. Miller was even in the picture. Talk about an act of faith!]



That afternoon, we strolled several miles through our neighborhood to work up an appetite while my husband, in response to a slew of questions, gave me a comprehensive history of the Republican Party of the 20th Century and the rise of the Evangelical Right. Fascinating stuff. After arriving home and to keep Mr. Miller's hunger at bay while I made the big meal, I served him hot stuffed mushrooms accompanied by a silky pinot noir by The Jibe. Then, we feasted on Herb Roasted Cornish Game Hens, Garlic Rosemary Mashed Potatoes, and broiled asparagus (see photo below). By some miracle, we both saved enough room for a slice of delectable Blackberry and Blueberry Pie smothered in vanilla bean ice cream.

Throughout the day and that evening, we were able to connect with my grandparents, my parents and Ev, and the Haupts over the phone as well as use our new webcam (thanks Dennis and Chris!) to talk to Zach, Kaley, and Keziah in Louisiana, and Mr. Miller's parents, other siblings, and some of the extended Miller clan in Washington.

It was, in short, a lovely day.

First attempt of a knitting novice

Last night as we watched the Iowa Caucus returns, I finished my first knitting project. I decided to take up knitting back in November as a creative activity for my amusement and to produce handcrafted clothes and toys for Evangeline. I'd never knitted before, but figured anyone could read and follow instructions. I checked out several books from the library and selected my first project: a petal bib. In typical "Lewis" fashion, I chose my first project based on aesthetics, not ease. And, in short order, I realized I was in way over my head. As I suffered through the assignment, cursing my ambition under my breath, I was reminded of some advice C.J. Mahaney gives in his little book, Humility. He writes that if you want to cultivate humility, learn to golf. Add knitting to that list.

In spite of all the dropped stitches, restarts and flubbing, a bib did emerge from my needles.


This quasi-success notwithstanding, I've already decided the next project will be simple knit-stitched toy blocks.

Happy Iowa Caucus Day!!! (The Political Musings of Mr. Miller)

Today marks the kickoff of the most unsettled Presidential year of our lifetimes. As a political junkie, I've been following all of the twists and turns of the campaign with obsessive detail. In this post, I offer a summarization of a year's worth of my political observations and a couple of prognostications for the race.

Let us start with a quick look at the Democrats:

Edwards has lived in Iowa since the end of the 2004 campaign and has based his whole campaign on the premise that a win there can springboard him to national success. He's in striking distance in the Hawkeye State, but I don't think he'll pull off the upset. And even if he wins in Iowa, I don't think the rest of the country's Democrats really want to nominate a White Male when they have, as Mark Steyn pointed out, "a woman, a black, an Hispanic . . . and they all think exactly the same. They remind me of The Johnny Mathis Christmas Album, which Columbia used to re-release every year in a different sleeve: same old songs, new cover. When your ideas are identical, there's not a lot to argue about except biography."

Hillary is running as a quasi-incumbent. Her name identification and her perceived campaign machine have kept her at the top of the national polls all year long. But her support is somewhat soft. If she loses Iowa or New Hampshire, her national lead will probable evaporate and the Democratic race will be tight. She also struggles among liberals who don't think they are Democrats, e.g., if you watch The Daily Show for your news and think you are "balanced," you don't like Clinton.

Instead, all of those Jon-Stewart-heads will vote for Obama. He is nothing but a traditional liberal, but my friends who love him think that he "transcends the partisan divide." Whatever. In any event, he will likely gain the lion's share of the anti-Hillary vote. If he wins Iowa and/or New Hampshire, he'll be a real force.

MY PREDICTION: I predict that Hillary and Obama will engage in a bloody fight for the next two months. And even then it might not be settled. The Democratic delegate selection process provides for proportional delegate selection. Meaning, if Obama wins 40% of the vote in a state, he gets about 40% of the delegates. I think this will mean that neither of them can clinch the nomination early. And, with both of them boasting huge war chests, this thing will be a knock-down, drag-out fight!

In the general election, Obama would be a little tougher to beat than Hillary. Her negatives are stratospheric while Obama coos tenderly about "uniting the country." But Obama's inexperience and youth would be a liability as well. None of the major Republicans should despair at their general election chances.

Now, onto those Republicans:

No presidential primary in either party has looked remotely like the 2008 GOP race. There is no frontrunner. Rudy, the guy who is still the odds-on favorite according to betting websites, is polling below Ron Paul in Iowa and has basically conceded he will not win a single primary before Florida on January 29th. And Fred Thompson, while sitting in fifth place nationally, is just five or six points out from first place. Crazy!

My first principle in this race is Anybody But Giuliani (ABG). Rudy's unabashed pro-choice and pro-gay stances are indistinguishable from those of the Democratic candidates. He'd be a fine nominee for that party, just not mine. Despite his promises to nominate "strict constructionist" judges, Rudy winning the White House would end the period of the GOP as the pro-life party. In all future elections, Big Business Republicans would point to Rudy and say we need to nominate a social "moderate" in order to win. The pro-life cause would be set back for decades.

Because of the imperative of ABG, I've been casting about for a candidate strong enough to prevent his nomination. But thankfully for the good guys, Rudy has shown clear signs of slipping over the last six weeks. His path to the nomination is premised on winning big-state primaries like Florida, New York, New Jersey, and California. The first of those states to vote is Florida on January 29. South Florida has a huge number of former New Yorkers who harbor affection for their former mayor, but the northern part of the state is conservative like the rest of the South. Rudy will get about 30% of the vote there, but I think that one of the other candidates will be able to unite the conservative majority in the party to Stop Rudy in FL. If that happens, his victories on February 5th in Delaware, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York will be hollow. While he will likely hold the most delegates of any candidate on the morning of February 6th, if he lost in Florida, he probably won't win the nomination.

But which of the other four major candidates should we support? That is a really good question. Let's consider each in turn.

1) First, there is John McCain. He plans on winning New Hampshire a week from today and having that rocket him to the head of the GOP field. McCain was the frontrunner a year ago, but is now the plucky underdog. The mainstream media has basically willed into being his rally in New Hampshire, reporting it two weeks before it materialized in the polling. They have not forgotten how they almost handed him the 2000 GOP nomination and are giving it another try this year. McCain is a very viable general election candidate because a lot of independents think he "transcends the partisan divide." He's done this by thumbing his nose at the conservative movement's standard bearers. This five-year-old article in the liberal New Republic thought McCain would make a fine nominee for the Democrats in 2004. John Kerry asked him to be his running mate! But for all of those heresies, I'd take him over Rudy in a heartbeat.

2) Then we have Fred Thompson. He's a bit of an enigma. While in the Senate, Thompson worked closely with McCain on Campaign Finance "Reform," but other than that built a solid conservative record. He's played YouTube clips of Romney's former pro-choice positions, yet his claims of historical pro-life purity fall flat. His campaign has been hardest hit by the rise of another Southerner, Huckabee. Unless Huck crashes and burns, Fred's campaign is Dead on Arrival. Indeed, a story released today says that Fred will drop out unless he surprises (finishes ahead of Huck) in Iowa.

3) As some of you may know, I've been a supporter of Mitt Romney for some time. Mitt clearly has campaigned on bad social positions in the past, but I think his conversion to conservative views, while "convenient" is real. He's not going to take office and suddenly revert to pro-choice or pro-gay-agenda positions. That's why both the Republican Majority for Choice and the Log Cabin Republicans have run ads intended to undercut his candidacy. They know that he's no friend of theirs anymore.

But for many Evangelicals, whether they acknowledge it or not, the question of Mitt's Mormonism has been more poignant. I don't think believers should rule out supporting him over this issue. A Mormon President would not lead to mass conversions to the Mormon faith. Americans already are aware of Mormonism and have decided not to convert. But in the political arena, why shouldn't Evangelicals work with Mormons? The vast majority of Mormons hold political views largely indistinguishable from my own. This agreement on pro-family policies (including both social and fiscal conservatism) is natural because Mormons share a pro-family ethic in their personal lives. I've always taken it as a complement when someone thought my parents must be Mormons because they had five kids. (See the homeschooler-friendly station wagon pictured below!)

Ever since the founding of the pro-life movement, Evangelicals and Roman Catholics have worked hand-in-hand as cobelligerents. I disagree with Catholic theology on many, many points and actually believe that in the Roman Church are not regenerated. Yet our political cooperation is a good thing for society. Political cooperation with Mormons should be endorsed, even welcomed, on the same principle.


Once Mitt's past liberal views and Mormonism are set aside, a very attractive candidate emerges. He has been faithful to one wife and has raised five successful sons. He has executive experience in business, in the Olympics, and as governor. He holds conservative positions on all of the major issues. He is strong in all of the early voting states and has a vast personal fortune that he is willing to spend in this campaign. He has been endorsed by Wayne Grudem and National Review.

4) Yet, I don't list Mitt last, because he's the candidate I support with my head. Huckabee has won a lot of my heart. Huck does not hold all of the conservative views that Mitt does, but he is a candidate loved by Josh Harris, Josh Harris's little brothers ( who told Chuck Norris), Justin Taylor, Michael Farris, and my groomsman David Talcott. I love that list of people! Those are my people! How can I dislike the guy that they all find so inspiring?

In the last six weeks, Huckabee has surged to the top of the Republican field. This surge has dismayed the Conservative Establishment. As compiled in a long list here, a TON of good people (Rush, National Review, etc.) are anti-Huck. I think there are three main reasons for this animosity. First, Huckabee's come-from-nowhere surge has proved wrong pundits who long ago limited the top tier to Rudy, Mitt, Fred, and McCain. Nobody likes looking bad. Secondly, there are Huck's conservative heresies: complaining that some CEO's make too much, raising taxes while Governor of Arkansas, and calling Bush's foreign policy an "arrogant bunker mentality." Huck does seem too willing to use populist rhetoric on the economy. But the final and most distressing reason that the conservative intelligentsia has turned on Huck is that he is an Evangelical who doesn't believe in Evolution. Erick at Redstate captured this trend perfectly in this must read post. These non-believing Conservatives are freaked out that Nominee Huckabee would embarrass them at their cocktail parties.

So I love Huck for his friends and I dislike the motivations of some of his enemies. The conservative intelligentsia and the liberal press think that Huck would be destroyed as a Christian extremist in the general election, but I think he could engineer a repeat of the 2000 and 2004 Red/Blue 50/50 elections that gave us Republican White Houses. He's not a sure loser. He's a political genius, who while untested, would be a tremendous nominee.

So, if I were in Iowa, I don't know which way I'd go. But by February 5th, the race should have crystallized with either Mitt, Huck, or McCain being the obvious Stop Rudy choice.

MY PREDICTION : Mitt Romney wins the nomination by the skin of his teeth and nominates Huckabee as his Veep to strengthen his Southern and Evangelical support.

Thanks for reading. The Burrow wishes you a Happy Election Year!

New Year's Eve

We rang in the New Year with some of our wonderful friends from Sovereign Grace City Church. Thirteen people crowded into our small apartment for an evening of bunco. After helping throw countless parties at my parent's spacious home in Arizona, I had doubts about hosting an event in our 650-square-foot apartment. But my friend, Jaymie, pointed out that people in NYC expect to squish into small spaces. Well, squish they did. We even had people seated in our bedroom. Still, the cramming created a lot of energy, especially once the game started.

None of our guests had played bunco before, and several expressed suspicion of this "brainless game created by suburban housewives." Before long, however, loud shouts and laughter filled the evening. Clearly the suburban game translates well to the urban environment. I also learned that several seemingly mild-mannered members of the church are actually viciously competitive.

Everyone enjoyed the fine spread of food: my mom's famous sausage balls, Cucumber Slices Provencal, Kierstyn's Quick Pesto Roll-Ups, chips and salsa, fresh vegetables and spicy Ranch dip, Death by Chocolate, ginger wafers, and mini-chimichangas. Drinks: water, wine, coffee, champaign, and Martinelli's for the pregnant ladies (Karla and me) and our littlest guest, Pasha.

Mr. Miller was a master host, keeping his guests' glasses brimming, engaging all in conversation, and organizing the bunco tournament from start to finish.

We left the main room in chaos with confetti, glasses, and dice strewn about so that we could wake-up to it in the morning and savor for a little longer the joy we experienced in spending time with our friends.

Between rounds of bunco

Roll those dice!




Jaymie and Dan :-)

Tim takes the party hat to a whole new level

Brett likes confetti

Yolanda's creative solution for carrying a cell phone
while wearing a pocket-less dress

Keith opens the bubbly - only ten minutes to go!

CELEBRATE!