I was reading through a series of comments related to the Supreme Court declining to hear a case brought by a High School student in Washington State against a local school board because it wouldn’t let her play Ave Maria at graduation.The student claimed the decision violated her rights of free speech and expression. The school board justified the decision by saying that many people would see the music as being religious in nature.
A fairly large percentage of the comments disagreed with the court and the school board. I would say the arguments fell into one of two broad categories.
Category #1 – Ave Maria is religious in nature but it’s ok to play religious music at a public school graduation.
Err, no, it is clearly NOT ok. Why is it not ok? Because the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has determined that the 1st Amendment says it’s not ok. People who say things like “show me where it says in the Constitution that church and state must be separate” overlook the case law that exists interpreting what the Constitution MEANS.
The separation of church and a state is a legal principle derived from the 1st Amendment Establishment Clause. The phrase comes from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802. The SCOTUS has repeatedly validated the principle but has sometimes disagreed on what the principle means.
The problems usually center on conflicts between the Establishment Clause and Free Speech which is precisely where this case draws the battle lines.
Under what circumstances can the state, in the person of a school board or a school, censor a student’s right of free expression?
Many people quote “the Constitution guarantees Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM Religion.” I have no idea who first said this as it’s been attributed to lots of people but its flat out wrong.
In Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971 the SCOTUS established a three pronged test to determine whether or not a government action violated the Establishment Clause.
1) The government action must have a secular purpose; 2) its primary purpose must not be to inhibit or to advance religion; 3) there must be no excessive entanglement between government and religion.
Take special notice of number 1. This is what guarantees Freedom FROM Religion at least as far as any government action is concerned.
This is not a matter of opinion. This is a matter of fact. If a government action fails ANY of the three prongs, it’s illegal. The teaching of Creationism fails the first prong. Posting the 10 Commandments, unless part of a broader context, fails the second prong and supporting parochial schools financially generally fails the third prong.
However, in this particular case the shoe is sort of on the other foot because part of the claim by the student was that, in prohibiting the playing of Ave Maria, the school board was being HOSTILE to religion.
The court found that it was not because the board’s action, prohibiting the playing of Ave Maria, passed all three prongs of the Lemon Test.
Note that the court NEVER addressed the question of whether allowing Ave Maria to be played at the graduation would have been a violation of the Establishment Clause.
Category #2 – Ave Maria may have a religious theme but as classical music it has an artistic value beyond its religious significance therefore its ok to play it at a public school graduation.
While I don’t doubt the artistic value of Schubert’s music, I have to point out that truth is in the eye of the beholder.
Could a reasonable man have interpreted the playing of Ave Maria at a public school graduation as an endorsement of religion?
The school board clearly thought this was a possibility and they decided to exclude it because they had established that graduation ceremonies were to be entirely secular in nature. Here is the e-mail from the district administrator to school principals.
“I am requesting that music selections for graduation be entirely secular in nature. My rationale is based on the nature of the event. It is a commencement program in celebration of senior students earning their high school diploma. It is not a music concert. Musical selections should add to the celebration and should not be a separate event. Invited guests of graduates are a captive audience. I understand that attendance maybe [sic] voluntary, but I believe that few students (and their invited guests) would want to miss the culminating event of their academic career. And lastly there is insufficient time at graduation to balance comparable artistic
works.”
In light of the decision to exclude all items of a religious nature from the graduation ceremony as a whole, and not just for this music selection, the restriction was what is known as “Content Restriction,” which is normally permissible, rather than “Viewpoint Restriction” which is normally not.
In other words, if you decide you want to talk about the NFL playoffs at a government sponsored seminar on nuclear power it’s OK for them to tell you to go to hell. That is NOT a violation of your right of free speech.
Therefore the court ruled that excluding Ave Maria under these circumstances was not a violation of the student’s right to free speech.
So in the final analysis the question wasn’t whether Ave Maria was appropriate, it was whether the school board was within its rights to decide it wasn’t, so the whole question of the artistic value of Schubert’s piece, as opposed to the religious value, is sort of meaningless.
In summary, the issue WAS NOT whether playing Ave Maria at the graduation violated the Separation of Church and state, it was whether the school board's decision that it might, and it's subsequent denial of permission, violated the student's constitutional rights. The court decided that it had not.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Student can’t Sue over Ave Maria
The Supreme Court has declined to hear a case brought by a High School student in Washington State against a local school board because it wouldn’t let her play Ave Maria at graduation.
The student claimed the decision violated her rights of free speech and expression. The school board justified the decision by saying that many people would see the music as being religious in nature.
Samuel Alito disagreed with the courts decision saying that the case raised broad issues of censorship at schools that should be reviewed by the court.
Now interestingly enough what most of us would recognize as Ave Maria is actually Schubert’s opus “Ellen’s Third Song” using words from Sir Walter Scott’s “The Lady of the Lake” in which Ellen is praying to the Virgin Mary.
Just like no one thinks of William Tell rather than the Lone Ranger when the “William Tell Overture” is played, only true classical music aficionados would think of Ellen from “The Lady of the Lake” rather than Mary, mother of Jesus, when Schubert’s tune is played. Schubert himself, when writing about it said "My new songs from Scott's Lady of the Lake especially had much success. They also wondered greatly at my piety, which I expressed in a hymn to the Holy Virgin and which, it appears, grips every soul and turns it to devotion."
In other words, it was always intended as a hymn to Mary. It just happens to be a hymn recited by a character in Scott’s poem. The board of education was right to prohibit its playing at a public school graduation and the court was right to deny hearing the case.
The student claimed the decision violated her rights of free speech and expression. The school board justified the decision by saying that many people would see the music as being religious in nature.
Samuel Alito disagreed with the courts decision saying that the case raised broad issues of censorship at schools that should be reviewed by the court.
Now interestingly enough what most of us would recognize as Ave Maria is actually Schubert’s opus “Ellen’s Third Song” using words from Sir Walter Scott’s “The Lady of the Lake” in which Ellen is praying to the Virgin Mary.
Just like no one thinks of William Tell rather than the Lone Ranger when the “William Tell Overture” is played, only true classical music aficionados would think of Ellen from “The Lady of the Lake” rather than Mary, mother of Jesus, when Schubert’s tune is played. Schubert himself, when writing about it said "My new songs from Scott's Lady of the Lake especially had much success. They also wondered greatly at my piety, which I expressed in a hymn to the Holy Virgin and which, it appears, grips every soul and turns it to devotion."
In other words, it was always intended as a hymn to Mary. It just happens to be a hymn recited by a character in Scott’s poem. The board of education was right to prohibit its playing at a public school graduation and the court was right to deny hearing the case.
Health Care
It looks like we’re going to get a Health Care Reform bill after all.
The Republicans are still jumping up and down over the tax increases and spending despite estimates that the bill will actually REDUCE the deficit by $138 billion over ten years.
However, let me quote Robert Bixby of the Concord Coalition, “You do have to assume that a lot of things will go right even for these numbers to work, but it's important to keep in mind that, even if they do work, we're still on an unsustainable path.”
And if the truth must be told, I doubt the savings are going to meet expectations and we’ll be lucky if the new taxes survive to be implemented. The Republicans will probably prevent the tax on high end Health Plans from ever being implemented as soon as they get the chance.
Isn’t it amazing that the Republicans don’t care about the 32 million uninsured Americans but they do care about the corporate executives with the Cadillac policies? No, the unions aren’t going to get hit by the tax. The delay in the start of the tax is intended to allow them to work things out.
So is this good or bad? I’m not sure. Certainly the objective is correct, but the execution may be lacking. The overall impact of the bill is hard to gauge. There are just too many factors and it’s a complex area.
The strategy is apparently to get the Health Bill in place and then, once the details are known, sell it. I think this is a major mistake and the delay simply magnifies the mistake. The bill, or at least the desperate need for a bill, should have been sold all along.
By allowing its opponents to frame the debate, public support for the bill has dwindled to a weak minority and it’s not going to be easy to resurrect it.
So what about the Republican’s concerns?
I’d have to ask, which set of concerns? The story has changed almost daily. You know you’re being lied to when the arguments you’re hearing change without notice.
First it was Death Panels, then it was illegal immigrants would be covered, then it was elective abortion would be covered and now, in the latest correspondence I’ve gotten from my Republican Congressman, Scott Garrett, it’s unconstitutional.
Garrett sent me an e-mail in November with a list of specific areas he wanted to “bring to my attention.” Last week I got a transcript of his official statement on the bill from the House floor.
Interestingly, NONE of the items in the November e-mail were mentioned in the March statement and NONE of the issues in the March statement were in the November e-mail.
Now, there may be a perfectly logical explanation for this but, off hand, I can’t think of one.
In January, in his response to President Obama’s State of the Union address, Governor Bob McDonnell said “Most Americans do not want to turn over the best medical care system in the world to the federal government."
In his floor statement on Health Care Garrett said “For the most part, Republicans and Democrats agree on the problems our health care system faces.”
Really? Did anyone clue in McDonnell and all the other yahoos that have been declaring it the best in the world? It’s the best in the world only IF you can afford it.
Granted there has been a consistent mantra from the Republicans related to cost but that appears to have been addressed in the bill. There are plans being put in place to bring medical costs under control. The questions are will they work, will they be enough and will Congress have the political will to leave them in place when the pinch starts getting felt and the howls of indignation can be heard.
I’m guessing the answers are Maybe, No and No.
The other semi-consistent mantra has been it will undo the economic recovery achieved by the stimulus package and send us back into an economic recession. Oh, but wait, they also claim the stimulus didn’t work. So which is it?
As for the Health Care bill causing an economic downturn, that’s based upon the voodoo economics of the Supply Side which is total nonsense. The fact is that it will effectively redistribute wealth from the rich to the working poor. This is a good thing because the propensity to consume of those folks is much higher. This will expand demand which will in turn spur investment.
If people could be made to understand the benefits in the bill, except for the most partisan Right Wing Evangelical Christian types, people would breathe a sigh of relief and wonder what all the fuss was about.
How is it going to affect me? I expect to get hammered with higher premiums. Someone has to pay for all those new benefits.
But this is a teeny, tiny step in the direction of resolving the budget crisis. In fact, we’ll be lucky if it doesn’t end up making things worse due to the lack of political will I see on the horizon. Attention now needs to be focused on eliminating the budget deficit and starting to reduce the current national debt.
May I suggest we start by getting the hell out of Iraq?
The Republicans are still jumping up and down over the tax increases and spending despite estimates that the bill will actually REDUCE the deficit by $138 billion over ten years.
However, let me quote Robert Bixby of the Concord Coalition, “You do have to assume that a lot of things will go right even for these numbers to work, but it's important to keep in mind that, even if they do work, we're still on an unsustainable path.”
And if the truth must be told, I doubt the savings are going to meet expectations and we’ll be lucky if the new taxes survive to be implemented. The Republicans will probably prevent the tax on high end Health Plans from ever being implemented as soon as they get the chance.
Isn’t it amazing that the Republicans don’t care about the 32 million uninsured Americans but they do care about the corporate executives with the Cadillac policies? No, the unions aren’t going to get hit by the tax. The delay in the start of the tax is intended to allow them to work things out.
So is this good or bad? I’m not sure. Certainly the objective is correct, but the execution may be lacking. The overall impact of the bill is hard to gauge. There are just too many factors and it’s a complex area.
The strategy is apparently to get the Health Bill in place and then, once the details are known, sell it. I think this is a major mistake and the delay simply magnifies the mistake. The bill, or at least the desperate need for a bill, should have been sold all along.
By allowing its opponents to frame the debate, public support for the bill has dwindled to a weak minority and it’s not going to be easy to resurrect it.
So what about the Republican’s concerns?
I’d have to ask, which set of concerns? The story has changed almost daily. You know you’re being lied to when the arguments you’re hearing change without notice.
First it was Death Panels, then it was illegal immigrants would be covered, then it was elective abortion would be covered and now, in the latest correspondence I’ve gotten from my Republican Congressman, Scott Garrett, it’s unconstitutional.
Garrett sent me an e-mail in November with a list of specific areas he wanted to “bring to my attention.” Last week I got a transcript of his official statement on the bill from the House floor.
Interestingly, NONE of the items in the November e-mail were mentioned in the March statement and NONE of the issues in the March statement were in the November e-mail.
Now, there may be a perfectly logical explanation for this but, off hand, I can’t think of one.
In January, in his response to President Obama’s State of the Union address, Governor Bob McDonnell said “Most Americans do not want to turn over the best medical care system in the world to the federal government."
In his floor statement on Health Care Garrett said “For the most part, Republicans and Democrats agree on the problems our health care system faces.”
Really? Did anyone clue in McDonnell and all the other yahoos that have been declaring it the best in the world? It’s the best in the world only IF you can afford it.
Granted there has been a consistent mantra from the Republicans related to cost but that appears to have been addressed in the bill. There are plans being put in place to bring medical costs under control. The questions are will they work, will they be enough and will Congress have the political will to leave them in place when the pinch starts getting felt and the howls of indignation can be heard.
I’m guessing the answers are Maybe, No and No.
The other semi-consistent mantra has been it will undo the economic recovery achieved by the stimulus package and send us back into an economic recession. Oh, but wait, they also claim the stimulus didn’t work. So which is it?
As for the Health Care bill causing an economic downturn, that’s based upon the voodoo economics of the Supply Side which is total nonsense. The fact is that it will effectively redistribute wealth from the rich to the working poor. This is a good thing because the propensity to consume of those folks is much higher. This will expand demand which will in turn spur investment.
If people could be made to understand the benefits in the bill, except for the most partisan Right Wing Evangelical Christian types, people would breathe a sigh of relief and wonder what all the fuss was about.
How is it going to affect me? I expect to get hammered with higher premiums. Someone has to pay for all those new benefits.
But this is a teeny, tiny step in the direction of resolving the budget crisis. In fact, we’ll be lucky if it doesn’t end up making things worse due to the lack of political will I see on the horizon. Attention now needs to be focused on eliminating the budget deficit and starting to reduce the current national debt.
May I suggest we start by getting the hell out of Iraq?
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Editing History
The Texas School Board, dominated by a clique of ultra conservatives, has decided that it’s time to rewrite history and make it more to their liking.
This is not unusual for the Right Wing. Recently Ann Coulter has decided that Joe McCarthy was a great American undone by a liberal conspiracy and Pat Buchanan has argued that Adolf Hitler was really a peace loving guy and the blame for World War II should go to Winston Churchill.
What makes what Texas does important to the rest of the country is that Texas purchases text books centrally rather than allowing local school boards to decide as New York does. Therefore Texas has enormous influence upon what appears in text books as the text book manufacturers fall over each other to line up with the Texas School Board guidelines.
Some of the curriculum directives approved by the Texas School Board include:
Replacing Thomas Jefferson with John Calvin
Texas is removing the reference to Jefferson’s Enlightenment based ideas from a standard related to the influence of political philosophers upon revolutions and replacing him with John Calvin.
The Religious Right doesn’t care for Jefferson who was a secular Deist who tended to distrust Christianity so they’ve decided to simply ignore possibly the greatest American political philosopher who ever lived.
No Separation of Church and State
The curriculum will address the Judeo-Christian influences of the founding fathers but not address the philosophy behind the separation of church and state. One Texas School Board official said flat out “I reject the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state.”
You might want to take that one up with the Supreme Court. Let me explain it slowly so even a dimwit like you might understand. The phrase “Separation of Church and State” is a pointed explanation of what the 1st Amendment means when it says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Call the U.S. a Republic rather than a Democracy
All references to “Democratic” institutions and practices are to be replaced by “Republican” institutions and practices.
Well, actually, they’re correct. This is a Republic and not a Democracy but they probably don’t know that. They just don’t want these things associated with the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party.
Hip-hop has not been included as a culturally significant movement
The conservatives rejected the inclusion of Hip-hop as culturally significant.
Well of course not. Nothing that isn’t white Christian could possibly be of any importance. Hip-hop is probably second only to Rock n’ Roll in musical cultural significance and to ignore it is simply hiding from reality. I don’t like it so I’ll shut my eyes real tight and maybe it will go away.
All Religions are not equal under the Constitution
The board refused to require that students be taught that the Constitution forbids the government from promoting one religion over another.
Now I wonder what religion they think the government should promote?
McCarthy wasn’t such a bad guy after all
The board required that when addressing McCarthy it be taught that the release of the Verona papers confirmed the Communist infiltration of the U.S. government.
I don’t think anyone ever doubted that there were real infiltration issues. The problem was the methods McCarthy relied upon. The lies, the innuendos and the general climate of fear and mistrust he fostered could have been taken right out of the Gestapo playbook.
The end does not justify the means. As soon as we accept that it does, we’ve already lost the war against totalitarianism.
Conservative Resurgence
The curriculum will cover the Conservative movements of the 1980s and 1990s including the Heritage Foundation and the National Rifle Association but not anything about liberal groups or minority rights groups.
Yup, heaven forbid one might confuse the young ones by teaching them about different ideas and the struggles for equality. Struggles supported by liberals and fought against tooth and nail by conservatives. Better to just brainwash them with only one slant. Besides, them there minority rights folks and liberals freed the slaves and forced us to treat blacks like real people and us white Christians, the only REAL Americans, ain’t gonna stand for it no more.
No teaching about the difference between sex and gender
Apparently one conservative board member worried that a discussion on that issue would lead students into the world of transsexuals and transvestites.
Well, isn’t that a world that educated people ought to at least know exists?
It’s not Capitalism, it’s Free Enterprise
The world Capitalism will be removed in favor of the term Free Enterprise.
Words carry with them impressions and “Free Enterprise” is so much more of a virtue word than “Capitalism” don’t you think? We wouldn’t want to give the kiddies even the slightest impression that anything supported by the Right Wing might have any kind of downside and leave them vulnerable to something like Socialism (even though we don’t understand what that is) now would we?
No Ted Kennedy or Sotomayor but lots of Reagan
The curriculum can ignore Senator Ted Kennedy and Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor but Ronald Reagan has been elevated in the amount of coverage he’s to receive.
There are heroes and there are villains. Let’s teach the kids to admire those conservative heroes and ignore those liberal villains.
No Tejanos at the Alamo
The conservatives rejected an effort to specifically mention that Tejanos were among the fallen at the Alamo.
I guess we should also ignore the fact that blacks fought in the American Revolution as well?
Like I said, all of this is a group of conservative Christian assholes attempting to rewrite history to make it match what they would like it to be or at least insure that their kids aren’t taught anything that might make them realize that conservative Christians have their heads up their asses.
This is pathetic but typical. What’s scary is that they will most likely get away with it as most Americans can’t be bothered to worry about stuff like this. The lack of vigilance and the attitude that it’s just a small collection of nuts is allowing the darkness to expand almost unimpeded in many areas of the country.
This isn’t education. This is political indoctrination. What’s next? Firing teachers that don’t pitch the party line? This is Nazi Germany all over again but with a cross as the symbol rather than a swastika.
To paraphrase and expand upon Upton Sinclair, when fascism comes to the United States it will be wrapped in a flag, carrying a bible and illuminated by the burning books in the background.
It won’t come all at once. It will come in small steps such as converting education into political indoctrination.
This is not unusual for the Right Wing. Recently Ann Coulter has decided that Joe McCarthy was a great American undone by a liberal conspiracy and Pat Buchanan has argued that Adolf Hitler was really a peace loving guy and the blame for World War II should go to Winston Churchill.
What makes what Texas does important to the rest of the country is that Texas purchases text books centrally rather than allowing local school boards to decide as New York does. Therefore Texas has enormous influence upon what appears in text books as the text book manufacturers fall over each other to line up with the Texas School Board guidelines.
Some of the curriculum directives approved by the Texas School Board include:
Replacing Thomas Jefferson with John Calvin
Texas is removing the reference to Jefferson’s Enlightenment based ideas from a standard related to the influence of political philosophers upon revolutions and replacing him with John Calvin.
The Religious Right doesn’t care for Jefferson who was a secular Deist who tended to distrust Christianity so they’ve decided to simply ignore possibly the greatest American political philosopher who ever lived.
No Separation of Church and State
The curriculum will address the Judeo-Christian influences of the founding fathers but not address the philosophy behind the separation of church and state. One Texas School Board official said flat out “I reject the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state.”
You might want to take that one up with the Supreme Court. Let me explain it slowly so even a dimwit like you might understand. The phrase “Separation of Church and State” is a pointed explanation of what the 1st Amendment means when it says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Call the U.S. a Republic rather than a Democracy
All references to “Democratic” institutions and practices are to be replaced by “Republican” institutions and practices.
Well, actually, they’re correct. This is a Republic and not a Democracy but they probably don’t know that. They just don’t want these things associated with the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party.
Hip-hop has not been included as a culturally significant movement
The conservatives rejected the inclusion of Hip-hop as culturally significant.
Well of course not. Nothing that isn’t white Christian could possibly be of any importance. Hip-hop is probably second only to Rock n’ Roll in musical cultural significance and to ignore it is simply hiding from reality. I don’t like it so I’ll shut my eyes real tight and maybe it will go away.
All Religions are not equal under the Constitution
The board refused to require that students be taught that the Constitution forbids the government from promoting one religion over another.
Now I wonder what religion they think the government should promote?
McCarthy wasn’t such a bad guy after all
The board required that when addressing McCarthy it be taught that the release of the Verona papers confirmed the Communist infiltration of the U.S. government.
I don’t think anyone ever doubted that there were real infiltration issues. The problem was the methods McCarthy relied upon. The lies, the innuendos and the general climate of fear and mistrust he fostered could have been taken right out of the Gestapo playbook.
The end does not justify the means. As soon as we accept that it does, we’ve already lost the war against totalitarianism.
Conservative Resurgence
The curriculum will cover the Conservative movements of the 1980s and 1990s including the Heritage Foundation and the National Rifle Association but not anything about liberal groups or minority rights groups.
Yup, heaven forbid one might confuse the young ones by teaching them about different ideas and the struggles for equality. Struggles supported by liberals and fought against tooth and nail by conservatives. Better to just brainwash them with only one slant. Besides, them there minority rights folks and liberals freed the slaves and forced us to treat blacks like real people and us white Christians, the only REAL Americans, ain’t gonna stand for it no more.
No teaching about the difference between sex and gender
Apparently one conservative board member worried that a discussion on that issue would lead students into the world of transsexuals and transvestites.
Well, isn’t that a world that educated people ought to at least know exists?
It’s not Capitalism, it’s Free Enterprise
The world Capitalism will be removed in favor of the term Free Enterprise.
Words carry with them impressions and “Free Enterprise” is so much more of a virtue word than “Capitalism” don’t you think? We wouldn’t want to give the kiddies even the slightest impression that anything supported by the Right Wing might have any kind of downside and leave them vulnerable to something like Socialism (even though we don’t understand what that is) now would we?
No Ted Kennedy or Sotomayor but lots of Reagan
The curriculum can ignore Senator Ted Kennedy and Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor but Ronald Reagan has been elevated in the amount of coverage he’s to receive.
There are heroes and there are villains. Let’s teach the kids to admire those conservative heroes and ignore those liberal villains.
No Tejanos at the Alamo
The conservatives rejected an effort to specifically mention that Tejanos were among the fallen at the Alamo.
I guess we should also ignore the fact that blacks fought in the American Revolution as well?
Like I said, all of this is a group of conservative Christian assholes attempting to rewrite history to make it match what they would like it to be or at least insure that their kids aren’t taught anything that might make them realize that conservative Christians have their heads up their asses.
This is pathetic but typical. What’s scary is that they will most likely get away with it as most Americans can’t be bothered to worry about stuff like this. The lack of vigilance and the attitude that it’s just a small collection of nuts is allowing the darkness to expand almost unimpeded in many areas of the country.
This isn’t education. This is political indoctrination. What’s next? Firing teachers that don’t pitch the party line? This is Nazi Germany all over again but with a cross as the symbol rather than a swastika.
To paraphrase and expand upon Upton Sinclair, when fascism comes to the United States it will be wrapped in a flag, carrying a bible and illuminated by the burning books in the background.
It won’t come all at once. It will come in small steps such as converting education into political indoctrination.
Monday, March 15, 2010
No Power
The power in my home went out Saturday night around 9 PM. It’s now 1:30 PM Monday and the power is still out. I’m being told that it may be out until Thursday.
Trees are down, roads are closed and in general Northern New Jersey has debris scattered all over the place. I have a piece of someone’s siding in my back yard; the cell phone service is spotty at best and as of this AM, I had no regular phone service.
Basically this sucks.
The road closings were the biggest headache. My daughter’s car broke down in the city of all places. For a price ($275 to be exact) we got her towed to a repair place not too far from home. I went to meet her and found out all the roads I usually take leading in that direction were closed. The first two I tried I could see the blockages. On the third one I decided to go around the barricade and almost met a very large tree up close and personal.
The tree was blocking both sides of the road, which sort of explained the closure and the barricade, but there was just enough room to get under it with branches scrapping the top of my car. Once I retrieved my daughter, and paid for her tow, I had to swing all the way north in order to get back home since I wasn’t going to play with that tree again.
We also haven’t been able to reach the repair place so even if they’re open, they have no idea what that white Liberty is doing there.
The early stages of the Hackensack River winds around the houses two blocks from where I live and it overflowed flooding the houses along the river up to the front yard. It’s the worst I’ve seen since the county installed a retaining wall to prevent that. The river went right up over the wall. What an absolute mess.
Not everywhere is out. Some folks have had power through the whole deal; others have already had it restored. I’m not all that thrilled that it’s going to take four days to restore mine but there’s not a whole hell of a lot I can do about it either.
I still have gas service so at least I have hot water but that could fail as well. Drinking water, on the other hand, is a tad iffy and folks are being told to boil it just in case, something I didn’t know this morning when I took my pills so I’ll probably come down with bubonic plague or something.
During little aberrations like this you realize how much you depend upon the conveniences of modern life. I often wonder how well we would all fare if things really went to hell.
Imagine no power, no phone service, no natural gas or heating oil, no gasoline for your car, no clean water and no food being delivered to local supermarkets. Add to that a collapse of basic services such as fire and police. What would we do?
Trees are down, roads are closed and in general Northern New Jersey has debris scattered all over the place. I have a piece of someone’s siding in my back yard; the cell phone service is spotty at best and as of this AM, I had no regular phone service.
Basically this sucks.
The road closings were the biggest headache. My daughter’s car broke down in the city of all places. For a price ($275 to be exact) we got her towed to a repair place not too far from home. I went to meet her and found out all the roads I usually take leading in that direction were closed. The first two I tried I could see the blockages. On the third one I decided to go around the barricade and almost met a very large tree up close and personal.
The tree was blocking both sides of the road, which sort of explained the closure and the barricade, but there was just enough room to get under it with branches scrapping the top of my car. Once I retrieved my daughter, and paid for her tow, I had to swing all the way north in order to get back home since I wasn’t going to play with that tree again.
We also haven’t been able to reach the repair place so even if they’re open, they have no idea what that white Liberty is doing there.
The early stages of the Hackensack River winds around the houses two blocks from where I live and it overflowed flooding the houses along the river up to the front yard. It’s the worst I’ve seen since the county installed a retaining wall to prevent that. The river went right up over the wall. What an absolute mess.
Not everywhere is out. Some folks have had power through the whole deal; others have already had it restored. I’m not all that thrilled that it’s going to take four days to restore mine but there’s not a whole hell of a lot I can do about it either.
I still have gas service so at least I have hot water but that could fail as well. Drinking water, on the other hand, is a tad iffy and folks are being told to boil it just in case, something I didn’t know this morning when I took my pills so I’ll probably come down with bubonic plague or something.
During little aberrations like this you realize how much you depend upon the conveniences of modern life. I often wonder how well we would all fare if things really went to hell.
Imagine no power, no phone service, no natural gas or heating oil, no gasoline for your car, no clean water and no food being delivered to local supermarkets. Add to that a collapse of basic services such as fire and police. What would we do?
Friday, March 12, 2010
The Destruction of Knowledge and the Rise of Stupidity
The greatest crime perpetrated by Christianity wasn’t the Crusades, it wasn’t the witch hunts and it wasn’t the inquisition; it was the destruction of the Great Library at Alexandria.
I’m aware that some Christian scholars have challenged the classical version of the story including the rape and murder of Hypatia. I’ve read the challenges and I’m not impressed. They’re the sort one would expect from the lawyer of a guilty man. They’re more in the realm of “your evidence I did it isn’t strong enough” rather than “here’s evidence that I didn’t do it.”
I especially love the argument that “all” the Christian mobs did was remove a smaller number of books and scrolls from pagan temples and destroy them as if it mattered where the knowledge was kept. There is more than enough evidence to lead me to conclude that books and scrolls were stored in a library building attached to the Serapeum Temple and both were destroyed by Christian mobs attempting to eradicate anything that disagreed with Christian dogma.
As I read posts and opinions by Christian fundamentalists disparaging science in particular, and knowledge in general, it becomes increasingly obvious that, given the opportunity, Christianity would gleefully engage in a second major burning of books and destruction of knowledge.
Knowledge and education are dangerous to religion. The more people know, the more educated they become, the more likely it is that they will see the reality that religion is utter nonsense.
The amount of pure stupid out there is mind boggling. There is no attempt to understand the facts. It seems perfectly ok to just make stuff up. The problem is the average American is such an idiot that he accepts that made up nonsense as truth without bothering to check.
I am absolutely flabbergasted at the complete crap, crap that is demonstrably false, coming from pulpits and right wing politicians and pundits that is accepted by the under 80 IQ Trailer Park set with nary a hesitation.
More and more my reaction is please tell me you’re not that stupid? Working class white America has been manipulated into supporting policies that run counter to their interests and Black America has somehow been convinced by Christianity to support the very philosophy that would like nothing better than to reinstitute Jim Crow and midnight lynchings.
Continue to deny homosexuals equal rights and eventually you will find your rights denied as well.
What I should do is laugh all the way to the bank but I know that eventually that stupidity is going to lead to trouble.
The Tea Party movement has some damn good points. It also has a significant lunatic fringe aspect. In the old days those good points would eventually have been absorbed into the political mainstream while the lunatic fringe aspects were discarded.
In today’s climate my concern is that the opposite may turn out to be the case. I see the lunatic fringe, fanned by political talking heads that only care about their ratings, growing while the valid points get lost in the misplaced enthusiasm.
Religion and science are not compatible. Science is continually searching for the truth. This of course assumes that the truth is not already fully known and will probably never be fully known. Religion on the other hand claims to already possess the truth and claims there is no need to search any further. New discoveries can only undermine the so-called “truth” that religion claims to already possess.
Not only are science and religion not compatible, the reality of the situation is that they are in a death struggle. Either science will destroy religion or religion will destroy science. There is no other possible outcome.
The Right Wing Conservative movement is mired in religion therefore by definition it is suspect. I’m actually a supporter of fiscal responsibility. I believe the federal budget should be balanced except in emergency situations. I would probably be a Republican if the party wasn’t courting the religious lunatic fringe. As long as that is the case I’m going to continue to try and get some fiscal reality into the Democratic agenda. Unfortunately I haven’t had any luck so far.
Now let’s talk about the Tea Party types.
The working class Tea Party supporters are the sorriest sons of bitches I’ve ever seen. They are being manipulated by the corporate fat cats to allow the continued fleecing of the American middle class. While the Halliburton, Exxon and Insurance company executives buy a ninth or tenth vacation home you sorry sons of bitches will be lucky if you can afford the health care you’ve been convinced to oppose reforming.
Here’s reality. The only solution to the budget crises is to cut services and increase taxes. Even the Republicans are eventually going to have to own up to that reality. The big questions are what spending gets cut and whose taxes go up?
If you continue to let yourself get manipulated then the “big government spending” that will go away is spending that benefits yourselves and the majority of Americans and, at the same time, any greater tax burden is going to land squarely on your shoulders.
If you’re making $40,000 a year, you NEED health care subsidies and the public option and you DON’T NEED to protect the Bush tax cuts. So why the hell are you supporting just the opposite?
It wasn’t big government that outsourced all those manufacturing jobs to China. It was the same people that are currently leading you around by the nose.
The reality is that the fat cats are manipulating you using fear and you dummies are falling for it. Socialism is not your enemy; environmentalists are not your enemy; gay marriage should be a big “don’t care;” someone’s decision about whether or not to have an abortion is none of your business and you should be clamoring for Health Care Reform.
Like I said, you are the sorriest sons of bitches I’ve ever seen.
Democracy ceases to function when the electorate cannot be relied upon to vote in their own best interest. Democracy in the United States is failing. If you want someone to blame for that, look in the goddamned mirror.
I’m aware that some Christian scholars have challenged the classical version of the story including the rape and murder of Hypatia. I’ve read the challenges and I’m not impressed. They’re the sort one would expect from the lawyer of a guilty man. They’re more in the realm of “your evidence I did it isn’t strong enough” rather than “here’s evidence that I didn’t do it.”
I especially love the argument that “all” the Christian mobs did was remove a smaller number of books and scrolls from pagan temples and destroy them as if it mattered where the knowledge was kept. There is more than enough evidence to lead me to conclude that books and scrolls were stored in a library building attached to the Serapeum Temple and both were destroyed by Christian mobs attempting to eradicate anything that disagreed with Christian dogma.
As I read posts and opinions by Christian fundamentalists disparaging science in particular, and knowledge in general, it becomes increasingly obvious that, given the opportunity, Christianity would gleefully engage in a second major burning of books and destruction of knowledge.
Knowledge and education are dangerous to religion. The more people know, the more educated they become, the more likely it is that they will see the reality that religion is utter nonsense.
The amount of pure stupid out there is mind boggling. There is no attempt to understand the facts. It seems perfectly ok to just make stuff up. The problem is the average American is such an idiot that he accepts that made up nonsense as truth without bothering to check.
I am absolutely flabbergasted at the complete crap, crap that is demonstrably false, coming from pulpits and right wing politicians and pundits that is accepted by the under 80 IQ Trailer Park set with nary a hesitation.
More and more my reaction is please tell me you’re not that stupid? Working class white America has been manipulated into supporting policies that run counter to their interests and Black America has somehow been convinced by Christianity to support the very philosophy that would like nothing better than to reinstitute Jim Crow and midnight lynchings.
Continue to deny homosexuals equal rights and eventually you will find your rights denied as well.
What I should do is laugh all the way to the bank but I know that eventually that stupidity is going to lead to trouble.
The Tea Party movement has some damn good points. It also has a significant lunatic fringe aspect. In the old days those good points would eventually have been absorbed into the political mainstream while the lunatic fringe aspects were discarded.
In today’s climate my concern is that the opposite may turn out to be the case. I see the lunatic fringe, fanned by political talking heads that only care about their ratings, growing while the valid points get lost in the misplaced enthusiasm.
Religion and science are not compatible. Science is continually searching for the truth. This of course assumes that the truth is not already fully known and will probably never be fully known. Religion on the other hand claims to already possess the truth and claims there is no need to search any further. New discoveries can only undermine the so-called “truth” that religion claims to already possess.
Not only are science and religion not compatible, the reality of the situation is that they are in a death struggle. Either science will destroy religion or religion will destroy science. There is no other possible outcome.
The Right Wing Conservative movement is mired in religion therefore by definition it is suspect. I’m actually a supporter of fiscal responsibility. I believe the federal budget should be balanced except in emergency situations. I would probably be a Republican if the party wasn’t courting the religious lunatic fringe. As long as that is the case I’m going to continue to try and get some fiscal reality into the Democratic agenda. Unfortunately I haven’t had any luck so far.
Now let’s talk about the Tea Party types.
The working class Tea Party supporters are the sorriest sons of bitches I’ve ever seen. They are being manipulated by the corporate fat cats to allow the continued fleecing of the American middle class. While the Halliburton, Exxon and Insurance company executives buy a ninth or tenth vacation home you sorry sons of bitches will be lucky if you can afford the health care you’ve been convinced to oppose reforming.
Here’s reality. The only solution to the budget crises is to cut services and increase taxes. Even the Republicans are eventually going to have to own up to that reality. The big questions are what spending gets cut and whose taxes go up?
If you continue to let yourself get manipulated then the “big government spending” that will go away is spending that benefits yourselves and the majority of Americans and, at the same time, any greater tax burden is going to land squarely on your shoulders.
If you’re making $40,000 a year, you NEED health care subsidies and the public option and you DON’T NEED to protect the Bush tax cuts. So why the hell are you supporting just the opposite?
It wasn’t big government that outsourced all those manufacturing jobs to China. It was the same people that are currently leading you around by the nose.
The reality is that the fat cats are manipulating you using fear and you dummies are falling for it. Socialism is not your enemy; environmentalists are not your enemy; gay marriage should be a big “don’t care;” someone’s decision about whether or not to have an abortion is none of your business and you should be clamoring for Health Care Reform.
Like I said, you are the sorriest sons of bitches I’ve ever seen.
Democracy ceases to function when the electorate cannot be relied upon to vote in their own best interest. Democracy in the United States is failing. If you want someone to blame for that, look in the goddamned mirror.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
No Prom in Itawamba
The Itawamba county school board in northern Mississippi decided to cancel the prom at the Itawamba County Agricultural High School rather than face the issue of a lesbian student that wanted to wear a tuxedo and bring her girl friend.
Well that makes a whole lot of sense now doesn’t it?
The school board didn’t specify the lesbian date issue as the reason but used the phrase “distractions to the educational process caused by recent events.”
In other words they didn’t even have the courage to openly admit what the motivation was behind their action. In the statement canceling the event the school board “hoped” that “private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors.”
Now that smacks of private citizens organizing a prom for whites only doesn’t it?
Prejudice is prejudice whether it’s based upon skin color, national origin, religion or sexual orientation. Why is it so hard to understand that?
You are not being asked to approve of homosexuals, simply to tolerate them. Let’s hear it for the good old southern Christians.
The combination of prejudice and cowardice is typical. Rather than say they’d rather cancel the prom than let a lesbian couple attend, they have to cover things in euphemisms. At least have the courage to admit you’re a bigoted son of a bitch.
Well that makes a whole lot of sense now doesn’t it?
The school board didn’t specify the lesbian date issue as the reason but used the phrase “distractions to the educational process caused by recent events.”
In other words they didn’t even have the courage to openly admit what the motivation was behind their action. In the statement canceling the event the school board “hoped” that “private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors.”
Now that smacks of private citizens organizing a prom for whites only doesn’t it?
Prejudice is prejudice whether it’s based upon skin color, national origin, religion or sexual orientation. Why is it so hard to understand that?
You are not being asked to approve of homosexuals, simply to tolerate them. Let’s hear it for the good old southern Christians.
The combination of prejudice and cowardice is typical. Rather than say they’d rather cancel the prom than let a lesbian couple attend, they have to cover things in euphemisms. At least have the courage to admit you’re a bigoted son of a bitch.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Health Care and Abortion
I can’t believe these people. Now the big deal is whether the wording in one bill or the other might somehow increase the number of federally funded abortions.
WTF is wrong with these people?
Both bills bend over backwards to make it clear that federal subsidy dollars are not to pay for insurance which covers elective abortions. As far as I can see the Hyde Amendment restrictions remain in place.
The problem appears to be different language. The House bill says premiums for insurance covering abortions must be paid for separately and the Senate bill requires a different policy. This is what is now preventing Health Care Reform from becoming a reality.
Give me a God damned break. Jesus, Joseph and Mary but you have GOT to be kidding me. Can somebody please write a simple English sentence making it clear that the Hyde Amendment restrictions trump anything else that might be implied or open to interpretation in the bill?
There is clearly no intent to change federal abortion policy. Can’t we get that properly articulated?
This is what we get for electing God damned lawyers to run things. Talk about dumb. Does everyone become a complete idiot when they move to D.C.?
WTF is wrong with these people?
Both bills bend over backwards to make it clear that federal subsidy dollars are not to pay for insurance which covers elective abortions. As far as I can see the Hyde Amendment restrictions remain in place.
The problem appears to be different language. The House bill says premiums for insurance covering abortions must be paid for separately and the Senate bill requires a different policy. This is what is now preventing Health Care Reform from becoming a reality.
Give me a God damned break. Jesus, Joseph and Mary but you have GOT to be kidding me. Can somebody please write a simple English sentence making it clear that the Hyde Amendment restrictions trump anything else that might be implied or open to interpretation in the bill?
There is clearly no intent to change federal abortion policy. Can’t we get that properly articulated?
This is what we get for electing God damned lawyers to run things. Talk about dumb. Does everyone become a complete idiot when they move to D.C.?
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
And then there were Six
The first same sex couples were married today in Washington D.C., the sixth American jurisdiction to recognize same sex marriage.
The District of Columbia’s legalization of same sex marriage may seem a small victory after the losses in Maine, New York and New Jersey last fall, but it is a victory.
The retreat is over although the time is probably not ripe for a new offensive. Gay marriage will become a reality but the path it will follow to get to general acceptance is still unclear.
The District of Columbia’s legalization of same sex marriage may seem a small victory after the losses in Maine, New York and New Jersey last fall, but it is a victory.
The retreat is over although the time is probably not ripe for a new offensive. Gay marriage will become a reality but the path it will follow to get to general acceptance is still unclear.
The Hoax of the Century
I read an article by Pat Buchanan entitled “Hoax of the Century.”
Buchanan starts out by describing Piltdown Man and Nebraska Man as the hoaxes of the last century.
Yes Piltdown man was a hoax but Nebraska Man was simply a mistake. A mistake I might point out corrected relatively quickly by normal scientific processes and peer review. Buchanan then has the audacity to quote Creationist Duane Gish about Nebraska Man and then refers to Eugene Windchy's book, “The End of Darwinism,” as the source for the stories. Well, two screw-ups amid thousands of pieces of evidence don’t mean much. One has to consider the total inventory of evidence not an aberration here or there.
The overall significance to the biological sciences of the Piltdown Man hoax and the Nebraska Man mistake is ZERO. When stacked against the total inventory of evidence for evolution they're utterly meaningless other than as interesting historical footnotes.
So Buchanan is already in a weak position when he begins to address his main topic which is Global Warming.
Remember I said the East Anglia “Climategate” fiasco was about to displace Nebraska Man as “evidence” that science can’t be trusted? While Buchanan managed to get both of them in the same article.
Along with the questionable processes at East Anglia Buchanan quotes a number of errors in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports and a number of dire predictions that haven’t panned out. But his big money points are that, unlike the Arctic, Antarctic ice is actually increasing and the 2009 hurricane season was quite mild and the winter quite harsh, precisely the opposite of the recent mild winters and harsh hurricane seasons which were touted as evidence for Global Warming.
He also makes the point that temperatures have not risen since the late 1990s and that there was a similar period of global warmth between 900 CE and 1300 CE which, not only wasn’t catastrophic, but was of some benefit to the population of the time.
Buchanan then concludes, based upon these points, that Global Warming is the Hoax of the 21st Century.
Certainly these are valid questions but are they adequate to reach such a definitive conclusion?
Well, not really, and here’s why.
Let’s start with the IPCC errors and East Anglia. Do such things weaken the Global Warming argument? Absolutely, but like the evolution aberrations they have to be considered in the context of the totality of the evidence.
As for temperatures not rising since the late 1990s, a little more accurate would be to say since the warmest year on record in 1998 they have not risen. Once 1998 falls off the rolling average things appear to flatten out, however that has happened in the past over the short term.
As a matter of fact between 1940 and 1950 the average global temperature steadily decreased for 10 straight years before reversing and beginning to rise again.
You cannot use short term data for long term analysis. While the trend is encouraging, more data is required. The decade from 2001 – 2009 was warmer than 1991 – 2000 so the jury is still out until the data for 2010 is in.
Buchanan makes it sound like the expanding Antarctic ice was a big secret but it isn’t. The ice shelf is expanding in east Antarctica even as it’s contracting in west Antarctica but overall, the continent is gaining more ice than its losing.
Again, in a vacuum this is a strong argument against Global Warming but it can’t be viewed in a vacuum. The ice in the Arctic is definitely contracting so why the difference? Well, Antarctica is a totally different environment than the Arctic, more surrounded by water which reacts differently than land to rising temperatures and it’s also home to the hole in the ozone layer.
The ozone layer hole appears to be repairing itself and affecting the weather patterns in the Antarctic. Some scientists believe that this is why things are different in the Antarctic for the moment. However the prediction is that this is a temporary respite. Again, I’d wait here until all the evidence is in.
By the way, remember when the Right Wing was telling us what a hoax the ozone layer hole was or how we couldn’t do anything about it? Sound familiar?
The mild winters and severe hurricane seasons of the recent years have been touted as evidence of Global Warming, so why isn’t the harsh winter and mild hurricane season of 2009 evidence against Global Warming? Well, I guess it is, but it’s rather weak evidence.
The mild hurricane season of 2009 is due to the presence of the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) which was in effect in the Pacific. The earth’s weather isn’t composed of isolated segments, it’s all interconnected. The ENSO occurs quasi-periodically on a 3 to 7 year schedule and one of its general effects is the breaking up of storms in the Atlantic before they can get too strong.
As for the harsher winter, well, no one ever promised consistency in the weather. I wouldn’t read too much into one season especially against the backdrop of the overall trend.
Now let’s talk about the warm period between 900 CE and 1300 CE. Since there weren’t any meteorological stations measuring global temperatures back then I would say that this is anecdotal evidence. Even so, I don’t see any reason to doubt, based upon historical evidence such as the colonization of Greenland, that it occurred. I’m just not all that sure what this means other than warming cycles are natural and we could just be in the middle of another one so it’s no big deal. Perhaps this is the case, but then again, perhaps it isn’t.
Notice that Buchanan is inconsistent. On the one hand he is arguing that Global Warming isn’t occurring, and on the other hand he’s arguing that it’s occurring, but its natural and no big deal.
This is the Christian Apologists trick. He throws out multiple, often contradictory, possibilities and then claims his case is made. You can’t have it both ways Pat. Which is it? It isn’t happening or its happening but it’s no big deal?
I’m not discarding this evidence, and Buchanan’s questions and observations are clearly evidence, I’m simply saying that when placed in context it’s not nearly as strong as Buchanan implies in his article and it doesn’t strike me as anywhere near strong enough to warrant his conclusion.
I’m on the fence about Global Warming. Clearly something is happening but what it is and what, if anything, we can or should do about it is unclear to me. That being said, I don’t see any harm with playing it safe especially if playing it safe can lead to a healthier environment and economic prosperity through the emergence and development of new technology.
Of course new technology always presents something of a problem for those making money with the old technology doesn’t it?
Buchanan starts out by describing Piltdown Man and Nebraska Man as the hoaxes of the last century.
Yes Piltdown man was a hoax but Nebraska Man was simply a mistake. A mistake I might point out corrected relatively quickly by normal scientific processes and peer review. Buchanan then has the audacity to quote Creationist Duane Gish about Nebraska Man and then refers to Eugene Windchy's book, “The End of Darwinism,” as the source for the stories. Well, two screw-ups amid thousands of pieces of evidence don’t mean much. One has to consider the total inventory of evidence not an aberration here or there.
The overall significance to the biological sciences of the Piltdown Man hoax and the Nebraska Man mistake is ZERO. When stacked against the total inventory of evidence for evolution they're utterly meaningless other than as interesting historical footnotes.
So Buchanan is already in a weak position when he begins to address his main topic which is Global Warming.
Remember I said the East Anglia “Climategate” fiasco was about to displace Nebraska Man as “evidence” that science can’t be trusted? While Buchanan managed to get both of them in the same article.
Along with the questionable processes at East Anglia Buchanan quotes a number of errors in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports and a number of dire predictions that haven’t panned out. But his big money points are that, unlike the Arctic, Antarctic ice is actually increasing and the 2009 hurricane season was quite mild and the winter quite harsh, precisely the opposite of the recent mild winters and harsh hurricane seasons which were touted as evidence for Global Warming.
He also makes the point that temperatures have not risen since the late 1990s and that there was a similar period of global warmth between 900 CE and 1300 CE which, not only wasn’t catastrophic, but was of some benefit to the population of the time.
Buchanan then concludes, based upon these points, that Global Warming is the Hoax of the 21st Century.
Certainly these are valid questions but are they adequate to reach such a definitive conclusion?
Well, not really, and here’s why.
Let’s start with the IPCC errors and East Anglia. Do such things weaken the Global Warming argument? Absolutely, but like the evolution aberrations they have to be considered in the context of the totality of the evidence.
As for temperatures not rising since the late 1990s, a little more accurate would be to say since the warmest year on record in 1998 they have not risen. Once 1998 falls off the rolling average things appear to flatten out, however that has happened in the past over the short term.
As a matter of fact between 1940 and 1950 the average global temperature steadily decreased for 10 straight years before reversing and beginning to rise again.
You cannot use short term data for long term analysis. While the trend is encouraging, more data is required. The decade from 2001 – 2009 was warmer than 1991 – 2000 so the jury is still out until the data for 2010 is in.
Buchanan makes it sound like the expanding Antarctic ice was a big secret but it isn’t. The ice shelf is expanding in east Antarctica even as it’s contracting in west Antarctica but overall, the continent is gaining more ice than its losing.
Again, in a vacuum this is a strong argument against Global Warming but it can’t be viewed in a vacuum. The ice in the Arctic is definitely contracting so why the difference? Well, Antarctica is a totally different environment than the Arctic, more surrounded by water which reacts differently than land to rising temperatures and it’s also home to the hole in the ozone layer.
The ozone layer hole appears to be repairing itself and affecting the weather patterns in the Antarctic. Some scientists believe that this is why things are different in the Antarctic for the moment. However the prediction is that this is a temporary respite. Again, I’d wait here until all the evidence is in.
By the way, remember when the Right Wing was telling us what a hoax the ozone layer hole was or how we couldn’t do anything about it? Sound familiar?
The mild winters and severe hurricane seasons of the recent years have been touted as evidence of Global Warming, so why isn’t the harsh winter and mild hurricane season of 2009 evidence against Global Warming? Well, I guess it is, but it’s rather weak evidence.
The mild hurricane season of 2009 is due to the presence of the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) which was in effect in the Pacific. The earth’s weather isn’t composed of isolated segments, it’s all interconnected. The ENSO occurs quasi-periodically on a 3 to 7 year schedule and one of its general effects is the breaking up of storms in the Atlantic before they can get too strong.
As for the harsher winter, well, no one ever promised consistency in the weather. I wouldn’t read too much into one season especially against the backdrop of the overall trend.
Now let’s talk about the warm period between 900 CE and 1300 CE. Since there weren’t any meteorological stations measuring global temperatures back then I would say that this is anecdotal evidence. Even so, I don’t see any reason to doubt, based upon historical evidence such as the colonization of Greenland, that it occurred. I’m just not all that sure what this means other than warming cycles are natural and we could just be in the middle of another one so it’s no big deal. Perhaps this is the case, but then again, perhaps it isn’t.
Notice that Buchanan is inconsistent. On the one hand he is arguing that Global Warming isn’t occurring, and on the other hand he’s arguing that it’s occurring, but its natural and no big deal.
This is the Christian Apologists trick. He throws out multiple, often contradictory, possibilities and then claims his case is made. You can’t have it both ways Pat. Which is it? It isn’t happening or its happening but it’s no big deal?
I’m not discarding this evidence, and Buchanan’s questions and observations are clearly evidence, I’m simply saying that when placed in context it’s not nearly as strong as Buchanan implies in his article and it doesn’t strike me as anywhere near strong enough to warrant his conclusion.
I’m on the fence about Global Warming. Clearly something is happening but what it is and what, if anything, we can or should do about it is unclear to me. That being said, I don’t see any harm with playing it safe especially if playing it safe can lead to a healthier environment and economic prosperity through the emergence and development of new technology.
Of course new technology always presents something of a problem for those making money with the old technology doesn’t it?
Friday, March 05, 2010
Creationists are Dishonest
First allow me to define what I mean by a “Creationist.” By that term I mean someone that rejects the Theory of Evolution in favor of a literal interpretation of Genesis and a six day creation.
It does not include people that accept evolution but believe either that God directed the process or had to first create the universe and the first living cell before evolution, directed or undirected, could occur.
That I had to include the first two paragraphs is the first evidence of the dishonesty I claim. The dishonesty occurs when Creationists attempt to muddy the water as to the meaning of the term. I hope I have defined it crisply enough.
So why do I say they are dishonest? There are lots of reasons but I’d like to focus on two examples of just one of them. I’d like to discuss two examples of what is known as Quote Mining.
Quote Mining is the art of taking a quote out of context and then using it as “evidence” of something often totally different from what the quote actually meant.
Two of the most popular Creationist examples, which you can find plastered all over the internet as “proof” either that evolution is false, or that scientists are abandoning it, are quotes by Stephen J. Gould and Niles Eldredge.
The quote from Gould is a statement to the effect that he declared neo-Darwinism “effectively dead.” The quote from Eldredge is usually given more completely as "We paleontologists have said that the history of life supports [the story of gradual adaptive change], all the while knowing it does not."
Now, if you know who Stephen J. Gould and Niles Eldredge are, an immediate warning flag should go up. Eldredge is, and Gould was, an evolutionary biologist and paleontologist who rank among the MOST OUTSPOKEN PROPONENTS of evolution that ever existed.
So WHY would they be contradicting what they have so often, and so strongly, defended? Did they suddenly see the light? Could they no longer hold up the rotting façade of evolution and finally have to admit the truth?
NO and NO!
Concept, science abhors an unexplained observation. If one exists, scientists will attempt to explain it. This is called a Hypothesis. Fact, the fossil record is incomplete. It has holes. Sometimes, it has very big holes. This is a simple observation. The question is then why do these holes exist?
One would think if evolution is a gradual steady process then, even given the rarity of fossilization, some of these holes should have been filled in by now. The conventional wisdom was, and to a large extent still is, that the holes are simply the result of missing documentation. Either Evolution was occurring but not fossilization or the fossils simply haven't been located yet.
Gould and Eldredge raised the possibility that perhaps those holes existed because there wasn't anything to find. That evolution, rather than a slow steady process, actually occurred in short, relatively rapid bursts. Since the timeframes would be compressed, the probability of anything approaching a complete record would be about zero.
Of course “relatively rapid” is still over millions of years, just a lot less millions of years.
They called this hypothesis “Punctuated Equilibrium” and believed that it explained the fossil record better than “Phyletic Gradualism” which is the term used to describe the steady, gradual approach.
In other words it’s an argument about HOW and not an argument about IF.
As I’ve said before, there are lots of arguments concerning evolution about how, when, why and where but none about if.
I’m not the first one to explain this. It’s been explained probably thousands of times that the quotes don’t mean what Creationists imply they mean. Yet Creationists continue to quote Gould and Eldredge and claim they are admitting that evolution is false.
This is dishonest. It is dishonest either because the Creationist knows the quotes don’t mean what is being implied they mean or, at the very least, the Creationist implies that he knows what the quotes mean when in fact he doesn’t.
As I’ve said before, any philosophy that feels the needs to engage in misleading or dishonest conduct in order to promote itself or its beliefs is by definition a false philosophy unworthy of respect or adherence.
It does not include people that accept evolution but believe either that God directed the process or had to first create the universe and the first living cell before evolution, directed or undirected, could occur.
That I had to include the first two paragraphs is the first evidence of the dishonesty I claim. The dishonesty occurs when Creationists attempt to muddy the water as to the meaning of the term. I hope I have defined it crisply enough.
So why do I say they are dishonest? There are lots of reasons but I’d like to focus on two examples of just one of them. I’d like to discuss two examples of what is known as Quote Mining.
Quote Mining is the art of taking a quote out of context and then using it as “evidence” of something often totally different from what the quote actually meant.
Two of the most popular Creationist examples, which you can find plastered all over the internet as “proof” either that evolution is false, or that scientists are abandoning it, are quotes by Stephen J. Gould and Niles Eldredge.
The quote from Gould is a statement to the effect that he declared neo-Darwinism “effectively dead.” The quote from Eldredge is usually given more completely as "We paleontologists have said that the history of life supports [the story of gradual adaptive change], all the while knowing it does not."
Now, if you know who Stephen J. Gould and Niles Eldredge are, an immediate warning flag should go up. Eldredge is, and Gould was, an evolutionary biologist and paleontologist who rank among the MOST OUTSPOKEN PROPONENTS of evolution that ever existed.
So WHY would they be contradicting what they have so often, and so strongly, defended? Did they suddenly see the light? Could they no longer hold up the rotting façade of evolution and finally have to admit the truth?
NO and NO!
Concept, science abhors an unexplained observation. If one exists, scientists will attempt to explain it. This is called a Hypothesis. Fact, the fossil record is incomplete. It has holes. Sometimes, it has very big holes. This is a simple observation. The question is then why do these holes exist?
One would think if evolution is a gradual steady process then, even given the rarity of fossilization, some of these holes should have been filled in by now. The conventional wisdom was, and to a large extent still is, that the holes are simply the result of missing documentation. Either Evolution was occurring but not fossilization or the fossils simply haven't been located yet.
Gould and Eldredge raised the possibility that perhaps those holes existed because there wasn't anything to find. That evolution, rather than a slow steady process, actually occurred in short, relatively rapid bursts. Since the timeframes would be compressed, the probability of anything approaching a complete record would be about zero.
Of course “relatively rapid” is still over millions of years, just a lot less millions of years.
They called this hypothesis “Punctuated Equilibrium” and believed that it explained the fossil record better than “Phyletic Gradualism” which is the term used to describe the steady, gradual approach.
In other words it’s an argument about HOW and not an argument about IF.
As I’ve said before, there are lots of arguments concerning evolution about how, when, why and where but none about if.
I’m not the first one to explain this. It’s been explained probably thousands of times that the quotes don’t mean what Creationists imply they mean. Yet Creationists continue to quote Gould and Eldredge and claim they are admitting that evolution is false.
This is dishonest. It is dishonest either because the Creationist knows the quotes don’t mean what is being implied they mean or, at the very least, the Creationist implies that he knows what the quotes mean when in fact he doesn’t.
As I’ve said before, any philosophy that feels the needs to engage in misleading or dishonest conduct in order to promote itself or its beliefs is by definition a false philosophy unworthy of respect or adherence.
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
No Flyover for God & Country Rally
The God & Country Festival has been held in Nampa Idaho since 1967. Part of the festival honors past and current members of the armed forces and last year, like every year, they requested a flyover from the U.S. Air Force. However for 2009 the request was denied.
The question is why the change?
The e-mails flying around the Internet are blaming Obama (next I expect to see him blamed for killing cock robin and burning Rome) but the president doesn’t get involved in such minutia.
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has a policy which prohibits the military’s support of events that “provide a selective benefit to any individual, group or organization, including any religious or sectarian organization.”
This policy has been in place since 2001 so why the refusal for the first time in 2009?
According to the Pentagon the nature of the event has changed. Where previously it focused more upon patriotism it now focuses more upon the religious aspects.
When organizers were asked about the nature of the event they said “Our mission is primarily about spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ” and the festival is “unashamedly a Christian event.”
So that clearly puts the festival under the DoD prohibition. Simply having one part of an openly religious function honor military veterans doesn’t change the nature of the function.
A flyover here would be roughly equivalent to a flyover of the Pope celebrating mass in Yankee Stadium.
Is it possible the Air Force group responsible for approving flyovers is less likely to approve an event with religious overtones given the secular outlook of the current administration than it was under a supposedly more religious administration like Bush’s?
It’s more than possible it’s damn well likely but that doesn’t change the situation. Objectively even the organizers of the event declare it religious in nature and therefore, based upon the DoD policy, no military participation is allowed. Under the principal of the Separation of Church and State, this is also the correct policy.
Christian organizations in this country are so used to getting special treatment they think they’re actually entitled to it which they aren’t. I’m surprised the Air Force isn’t being accused of persecuting them.
The question is why the change?
The e-mails flying around the Internet are blaming Obama (next I expect to see him blamed for killing cock robin and burning Rome) but the president doesn’t get involved in such minutia.
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has a policy which prohibits the military’s support of events that “provide a selective benefit to any individual, group or organization, including any religious or sectarian organization.”
This policy has been in place since 2001 so why the refusal for the first time in 2009?
According to the Pentagon the nature of the event has changed. Where previously it focused more upon patriotism it now focuses more upon the religious aspects.
When organizers were asked about the nature of the event they said “Our mission is primarily about spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ” and the festival is “unashamedly a Christian event.”
So that clearly puts the festival under the DoD prohibition. Simply having one part of an openly religious function honor military veterans doesn’t change the nature of the function.
A flyover here would be roughly equivalent to a flyover of the Pope celebrating mass in Yankee Stadium.
Is it possible the Air Force group responsible for approving flyovers is less likely to approve an event with religious overtones given the secular outlook of the current administration than it was under a supposedly more religious administration like Bush’s?
It’s more than possible it’s damn well likely but that doesn’t change the situation. Objectively even the organizers of the event declare it religious in nature and therefore, based upon the DoD policy, no military participation is allowed. Under the principal of the Separation of Church and State, this is also the correct policy.
Christian organizations in this country are so used to getting special treatment they think they’re actually entitled to it which they aren’t. I’m surprised the Air Force isn’t being accused of persecuting them.
Religious Right Sues over Hate Crimes Law
Here are excerpts from the article by CNS News with commentary.
“A conservative civil liberties group is challenging the constitutionality of the recently enacted federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.”
A hate crime is defined as a violent act directed against an individual or group purely because of some characteristic of that individual or group. Race, color, religion, ethnicity and country of origin were already covered by previous legislation; the 2009 bill extends the definition to sexual orientation and sexual identity.
“The new law, attached to a defense authorization bill that President Obama signed on October 28, 2009, makes it a federal crime to attack someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
Well, sort of. What it actually does is authorize the Justice Department to extend help to jurisdictions investigating potential hate crimes, if the jurisdiction requests such help, and allows the Justice Department to pursue prosecution at the discretion of the Attorney General under certain circumstances after consultation with state authorities.
(a) The state either doesn’t have jurisdiction or chooses not to exercise jurisdiction
(b) The state requests the Federal Government to assume jurisdiction
(c) The state does not object to the Federal Government assuming jurisdiction
(d) The verdict or sentence obtained left “demonstrably unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias motivated bias.”
I don’t have a problem with (a) and (b); I’m not so sure about (c) but I don’t like (d) at all. I understand the need for it though. I remember the 1950s and 1960s where getting a white man convicted in the South of a crime against a black man was virtually impossible. I guess one could argue that it’s a necessary evil but I feel uncomfortable with it.
Something else that bothers me is what the hell is this doing attached to a defense authorization bill?
“The Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center says it elevates people engaged in deviant sexual behaviors to a special, protected class of persons under federal law.”
It is deviant sexual behaviors according to whom? That’s your opinion. While I’m willing to admit that the jury is still out on exactly why some small percentage of the population has its sexual wires crossed, the general indication appears to be that’s it’s about as much a choice as being left handed.
“The lawsuit naming U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of three pastors and the president of the American Family Association of Michigan.”
So the case was filed on behalf of three bigots and a loon, got it.
“All of the plaintiffs ‘take a strong public stand against the homosexual agenda, which seeks to normalize disordered sexual behavior that is contrary to Biblical teaching,’ the Law Center said in a news release.”
Actually, to be a little more accurate, it’s contrary to THEIR INTERPRETATION of “Biblical teaching.” Not everyone agrees. The last time I looked, they were entitled to their opinion but, in a secular society, what the Bible says, even if there was universal agreement on what it says, is irrelevant.
“’This is part of the list of political payoffs to homosexual advocacy groups for support of Barack Obama in the last presidential election,’ Thompson continued.”
That’s not very likely. As a matter of fact the gay faction is not at all happy with Barack and his decision to put gay issues on the back burner.
“The sole purpose of this law is to criminalize the Bible and use the threat of federal prosecutions and long jail sentences to silence Christians from expressing their Biblically-based religious belief that homosexual conduct is a sin.
This is flat out not true. Section 8 of the bill specifically exempts “expressive conduct” and “activities protected by the constitution” and, the last time I looked, speech and the press were still protected. A situation that people like The Thomas More Law Center would like to amend so that everyone has to agree with what Christians say.
"It elevates those persons who engage in deviant sexual behaviors, including pedophiles, to a special protected class of persons as a matter of federal law and policy.”
This is total crap. The law does not cover “sexual behaviors” but “sexual identity” and “sexual orientation.” Pedophilia is a mental disorder and not an orientation or an identity therefore it most certainly would not be covered by the bill.
“According to the Law Center, of the 1.38 million violent crimes in the U.S. reported by the FBI in 2008, only 243 were considered to be motivated by the victim’s sexual orientation.”
Of course without the hate crimes coverage there is no particular reason to keep track at the moment so I’d take this statistic with a sack of salt.
“The lawsuit alleges that the new law violates the plaintiffs’ rights to freedom of speech, expressive association, and free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment, and it violates the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment.”
As previously pointed out, all of these things are explicitly protected in section 8 of the bill. The law addresses VIOLENT CRIMES and not speech. The detailed argument here that I’ve seen is if a pastor’s sermon condemning homosexuality incites a parishioner to commit a violent act then the pastor could be prosecuted.
Allow me to suggest that the pastor might want to reconsider what he’s saying. Whatever happened to “hate the sin but love the sinner?” I guess that’s another Christian lie.
Any pastor whose sermon incites parishioners to violence SHOULD be prosecuted. Free Speech is not unrestricted. You cannot yell “FIRE” in a crowded theater and you cannot advocate violent or criminal acts.
“The lawsuit also alleges that Congress lacked authority to enact the legislation under the Tenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.”
I would hesitate to take the position that the Federal Government lacks the authority to protect its citizens from bodily harm because of some physical aspect over which they have no control.
So this is really the same old argument again. Is sexual orientation a genetic or hormonal imperative or is it a lifestyle choice?
The overwhelming majority of evidence indicates that it’s not a choice. As I said before, exactly why some people have their sexual wires crossed is unclear. Perhaps it’s nature’s way of implementing population control. I really don’t know.
I do know that there are a fairly large number of homosexuals that view the orientation as a curse and would gladly change their orientation to heterosexual if that were possible which, at least for the moment, it isn’t. The success rate of reparative therapy appears to be zero.
I wonder what would happen if someone were to figure out a way to change sexual orientation?
I suspect this law suit is going nowhere but I’ve been wrong before.
“A conservative civil liberties group is challenging the constitutionality of the recently enacted federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.”
A hate crime is defined as a violent act directed against an individual or group purely because of some characteristic of that individual or group. Race, color, religion, ethnicity and country of origin were already covered by previous legislation; the 2009 bill extends the definition to sexual orientation and sexual identity.
“The new law, attached to a defense authorization bill that President Obama signed on October 28, 2009, makes it a federal crime to attack someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
Well, sort of. What it actually does is authorize the Justice Department to extend help to jurisdictions investigating potential hate crimes, if the jurisdiction requests such help, and allows the Justice Department to pursue prosecution at the discretion of the Attorney General under certain circumstances after consultation with state authorities.
(a) The state either doesn’t have jurisdiction or chooses not to exercise jurisdiction
(b) The state requests the Federal Government to assume jurisdiction
(c) The state does not object to the Federal Government assuming jurisdiction
(d) The verdict or sentence obtained left “demonstrably unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias motivated bias.”
I don’t have a problem with (a) and (b); I’m not so sure about (c) but I don’t like (d) at all. I understand the need for it though. I remember the 1950s and 1960s where getting a white man convicted in the South of a crime against a black man was virtually impossible. I guess one could argue that it’s a necessary evil but I feel uncomfortable with it.
Something else that bothers me is what the hell is this doing attached to a defense authorization bill?
“The Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center says it elevates people engaged in deviant sexual behaviors to a special, protected class of persons under federal law.”
It is deviant sexual behaviors according to whom? That’s your opinion. While I’m willing to admit that the jury is still out on exactly why some small percentage of the population has its sexual wires crossed, the general indication appears to be that’s it’s about as much a choice as being left handed.
“The lawsuit naming U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of three pastors and the president of the American Family Association of Michigan.”
So the case was filed on behalf of three bigots and a loon, got it.
“All of the plaintiffs ‘take a strong public stand against the homosexual agenda, which seeks to normalize disordered sexual behavior that is contrary to Biblical teaching,’ the Law Center said in a news release.”
Actually, to be a little more accurate, it’s contrary to THEIR INTERPRETATION of “Biblical teaching.” Not everyone agrees. The last time I looked, they were entitled to their opinion but, in a secular society, what the Bible says, even if there was universal agreement on what it says, is irrelevant.
“’This is part of the list of political payoffs to homosexual advocacy groups for support of Barack Obama in the last presidential election,’ Thompson continued.”
That’s not very likely. As a matter of fact the gay faction is not at all happy with Barack and his decision to put gay issues on the back burner.
“The sole purpose of this law is to criminalize the Bible and use the threat of federal prosecutions and long jail sentences to silence Christians from expressing their Biblically-based religious belief that homosexual conduct is a sin.
This is flat out not true. Section 8 of the bill specifically exempts “expressive conduct” and “activities protected by the constitution” and, the last time I looked, speech and the press were still protected. A situation that people like The Thomas More Law Center would like to amend so that everyone has to agree with what Christians say.
"It elevates those persons who engage in deviant sexual behaviors, including pedophiles, to a special protected class of persons as a matter of federal law and policy.”
This is total crap. The law does not cover “sexual behaviors” but “sexual identity” and “sexual orientation.” Pedophilia is a mental disorder and not an orientation or an identity therefore it most certainly would not be covered by the bill.
“According to the Law Center, of the 1.38 million violent crimes in the U.S. reported by the FBI in 2008, only 243 were considered to be motivated by the victim’s sexual orientation.”
Of course without the hate crimes coverage there is no particular reason to keep track at the moment so I’d take this statistic with a sack of salt.
“The lawsuit alleges that the new law violates the plaintiffs’ rights to freedom of speech, expressive association, and free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment, and it violates the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment.”
As previously pointed out, all of these things are explicitly protected in section 8 of the bill. The law addresses VIOLENT CRIMES and not speech. The detailed argument here that I’ve seen is if a pastor’s sermon condemning homosexuality incites a parishioner to commit a violent act then the pastor could be prosecuted.
Allow me to suggest that the pastor might want to reconsider what he’s saying. Whatever happened to “hate the sin but love the sinner?” I guess that’s another Christian lie.
Any pastor whose sermon incites parishioners to violence SHOULD be prosecuted. Free Speech is not unrestricted. You cannot yell “FIRE” in a crowded theater and you cannot advocate violent or criminal acts.
“The lawsuit also alleges that Congress lacked authority to enact the legislation under the Tenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.”
I would hesitate to take the position that the Federal Government lacks the authority to protect its citizens from bodily harm because of some physical aspect over which they have no control.
So this is really the same old argument again. Is sexual orientation a genetic or hormonal imperative or is it a lifestyle choice?
The overwhelming majority of evidence indicates that it’s not a choice. As I said before, exactly why some people have their sexual wires crossed is unclear. Perhaps it’s nature’s way of implementing population control. I really don’t know.
I do know that there are a fairly large number of homosexuals that view the orientation as a curse and would gladly change their orientation to heterosexual if that were possible which, at least for the moment, it isn’t. The success rate of reparative therapy appears to be zero.
I wonder what would happen if someone were to figure out a way to change sexual orientation?
I suspect this law suit is going nowhere but I’ve been wrong before.
Monday, February 22, 2010
The Great Derangement Part 2
I’ve gotten deeper into Matt Taibi’s book and finished chapters related to the ways things really work in Congress, a religious retreat for a fundamentalist Christian Church and his stint as an embedded reported in Iraq.
The chapters on Congress and Iraq are guaranteed to piss you off. The first takes you through the process of a bill working its way through the House of Representatives. No, not how you and I think it works, but how it really works.
According to Matt, nothing happens in the open on the House floor; rather everything occurs behind closed doors and after hours in the committee meetings where the primary objective is to insure that the corporate sponsors get what they paid for.
The bill Taibbi uses as his example is a bill put together in the wake of Hurricane Katrina supposedly to help insure adequate supplies of gasoline by enabling the building of new refineries. The only problem being there is already a surplus of refinery capacity in the U.S. and most of the gas companies believe money could be saved by shutting some down.
So what’s the point you ask? Apparently the point was to sneak through additional exemptions to environmental controls and establish a legal mechanism for turning government land, free of charge, over to the gas companies. To make matters worse the bill was touted as an “emergency measure” in the wake of Katrina to guarantee it an express route through Congress.
In Taibbi’s example it was the Republicans forcing a bill through despite the helpless protestations of the minority Democrats but I’m sure it works both ways.
According to Matt, under the Republicans bills went from the Rules Committee to the floor for a vote, usually in a completely rewritten state and, by being tagged as an emergency measure, with not nearly enough time for evaluation. If this is true, then I have to correct myself with respect to the Tea Party idea of all bills made public for 7 days before a vote. I agreed with the idea anyway but didn’t think it was such a big deal. If Taibbi is right, then it is a big deal.
The Iraq segment will get your blood boiling with Taibbi’s description of soldiers having to buy their own equipment because politicians like to raid the military equipment budgets for their earmarks while leaving the big military spending contracts untouched.
I believe this has sort of been addressed. By law the army MUST repay soldiers for equipment they had to purchase. A law, I might point out, sponsored and pushed through by DEMOCRATS.
Of course the shortages were a disgrace to begin with. If it wasn’t criminal to send troops into an unnecessary war, if it wasn’t criminal to send them in insufficient numbers, then it certainly was criminal to send them without the necessary equipment.
Unfortunately neither of these two chapters surprised me.
The chapter on the church group however shocked the hell out of me. I’m now about halfway through the second chapter on the group and its getting worse.
I understand that there is a range but Taibbi’s descriptions scare the hell out of me. He is describing people who live in a demon haunted world of superstition and have long ago lost, assuming they ever had it, any ability to apply critical thinking to the crap coming at them from the pulpit.
These are people who have serious discussions about what is, and is not, idol worship and how to prevent opening the door for demons to take possession of you or your family. A world where Harry Potter books in your house can lead to demons taking possession of your children.
In other words, these people are as crazy as loons.
That such idiocy can be taken seriously in a country that possesses the largest thermonuclear arsenal in the word is truly frightening.
Hopefully we’re talking about a really small percentage of the population here but I can’t help getting the feeling that I’m in a fortress and outside the darkness is spreading and, slowly but surely, closing in upon me.
The chapters on Congress and Iraq are guaranteed to piss you off. The first takes you through the process of a bill working its way through the House of Representatives. No, not how you and I think it works, but how it really works.
According to Matt, nothing happens in the open on the House floor; rather everything occurs behind closed doors and after hours in the committee meetings where the primary objective is to insure that the corporate sponsors get what they paid for.
The bill Taibbi uses as his example is a bill put together in the wake of Hurricane Katrina supposedly to help insure adequate supplies of gasoline by enabling the building of new refineries. The only problem being there is already a surplus of refinery capacity in the U.S. and most of the gas companies believe money could be saved by shutting some down.
So what’s the point you ask? Apparently the point was to sneak through additional exemptions to environmental controls and establish a legal mechanism for turning government land, free of charge, over to the gas companies. To make matters worse the bill was touted as an “emergency measure” in the wake of Katrina to guarantee it an express route through Congress.
In Taibbi’s example it was the Republicans forcing a bill through despite the helpless protestations of the minority Democrats but I’m sure it works both ways.
According to Matt, under the Republicans bills went from the Rules Committee to the floor for a vote, usually in a completely rewritten state and, by being tagged as an emergency measure, with not nearly enough time for evaluation. If this is true, then I have to correct myself with respect to the Tea Party idea of all bills made public for 7 days before a vote. I agreed with the idea anyway but didn’t think it was such a big deal. If Taibbi is right, then it is a big deal.
The Iraq segment will get your blood boiling with Taibbi’s description of soldiers having to buy their own equipment because politicians like to raid the military equipment budgets for their earmarks while leaving the big military spending contracts untouched.
I believe this has sort of been addressed. By law the army MUST repay soldiers for equipment they had to purchase. A law, I might point out, sponsored and pushed through by DEMOCRATS.
Of course the shortages were a disgrace to begin with. If it wasn’t criminal to send troops into an unnecessary war, if it wasn’t criminal to send them in insufficient numbers, then it certainly was criminal to send them without the necessary equipment.
Unfortunately neither of these two chapters surprised me.
The chapter on the church group however shocked the hell out of me. I’m now about halfway through the second chapter on the group and its getting worse.
I understand that there is a range but Taibbi’s descriptions scare the hell out of me. He is describing people who live in a demon haunted world of superstition and have long ago lost, assuming they ever had it, any ability to apply critical thinking to the crap coming at them from the pulpit.
These are people who have serious discussions about what is, and is not, idol worship and how to prevent opening the door for demons to take possession of you or your family. A world where Harry Potter books in your house can lead to demons taking possession of your children.
In other words, these people are as crazy as loons.
That such idiocy can be taken seriously in a country that possesses the largest thermonuclear arsenal in the word is truly frightening.
Hopefully we’re talking about a really small percentage of the population here but I can’t help getting the feeling that I’m in a fortress and outside the darkness is spreading and, slowly but surely, closing in upon me.
Friday, February 19, 2010
A Trip Through my Inbox
It’s a typical day at the old inbox. There’s always a lot of junk that I usually toss, some stuff that I typically file away for future reference and e-mail comments and complaints that I typically respond to and sometimes make me update a post.
Often what’s left are the “pitches” associated with some cause; someone looking for me to either do something, send money or buy something. Here are today’s pitches, in order of arrival, identified by e-mail title and pseudo-author. I say “pseudo-author” because these are mass e-mails distributions and I doubt the “pseudo-author” actually wrote the e-mail although he may have approved it.
A death in Homer – Morris Dees
Morris Dees is the head of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the e-mail addresses the shooting death of a 73 year old black man named Bernard Monroe at a family gathering in Homer, Louisiana. The SPLC has filed suit against the town for the benefit of the man’s widow and five children claiming a history of racial profiling and police harassment of African-Americans.
The SPLC description is long on outrage but a tad short on details other than it all started with the police chasing an adult son of Monroe’s into his house. It doesn’t present any reason for the police to have opened fire and that’s a bit strange even for Jim Crow era wannabes.
A quick check for news reports about the incident reveled that the police claimed to have chased the son from a suspected drug deal and that he had two prior convictions for assault and battery. The police also claim that Monroe advanced upon them with a drawn pistol. Neighbors and family at the gathering say Monroe was carrying a bottle of water and that the police planted the gun. However the gun was in fact owned by Monroe.
Hmmm. This one wouldn’t surprise me either way. I think I’ll let the law run its course without expressing any opinion.
Have you seen this? – David Plouffe
This one contains a graph from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showing how the stimulus package has apparently slowed down the loss of jobs.
My question is why are you telling ME this? Why isn’t this plastered all over every front page in the U.S.?
Tell Google: No Deal with the NSA – Anthony D. Romano
This is the ACLU complaining about the potential implications of Google approaching the NSA for help in investigating the recent cyber attacks it experienced, which may have originated in China, and to help them protect its confidential files from compromise.
The ACLU is concerned this would give the NSA access to confidential information about individuals possessed by Google despite assurances that this would not be the case.
The ACLU believes “If Google can't adequately protect its customers' personal information, it is obligated to notify them so these consumers can make informed choices about what information they provide, or the company must minimize the risk by reducing the amount and type of information it collects and retains about its customers.”
Well consider this the notification that it can’t do so without help. Personally I would never divulge information to any Internet source that I felt was sensitive. I have one credit card that I use for Internet purchases and I carefully restrict and monitor its use.
I think the ACLU is being overly paranoid here and Google is doing the right thing by asking for help.
Earn your Masters in Diplomacy – Norwich University
Diplomacy? They’ve got to be kidding.
Breathtaking Hypocrisy – Tim Kaine
The Democratic National Chairman complaining about Republican congressmen and senators who attack the stimulus package publically yet take credit for the positive effects of the package in their home districts and states.
Let’s see, politicians are hypocrites; not much of a news flash there. Again, I have to ask, why are you telling ME.
Tim is talking about a “rapid-response program to fact check every lie” and is of course asking for money to support it. You will excuse me but given the total ineptitude of the Democrats in countering Republican propaganda this would be like dropping money down a well.
First show me you’ve even vaguely capable of mounting an effective campaign and then maybe.
Dick Cheney Confessed – Becky Bond
This is Credo Action screaming that Dick Cheney admitted to being an advocate of waterboarding on ABC news and, since waterboarding is torture and a war crime, he should therefore be prosecuted.
I seem to remember saying with some regularity that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice should probably all be prosecuted, given a fair trial and then strung up from any convenient tree.
The Democrats don’t have the balls to do anything of the sort.
Well, that’s about it this time around. Not nearly as entertaining a post as I thought it might be. Maybe I’ll go work some more on that “If I were elected President idea?”
Often what’s left are the “pitches” associated with some cause; someone looking for me to either do something, send money or buy something. Here are today’s pitches, in order of arrival, identified by e-mail title and pseudo-author. I say “pseudo-author” because these are mass e-mails distributions and I doubt the “pseudo-author” actually wrote the e-mail although he may have approved it.
A death in Homer – Morris Dees
Morris Dees is the head of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the e-mail addresses the shooting death of a 73 year old black man named Bernard Monroe at a family gathering in Homer, Louisiana. The SPLC has filed suit against the town for the benefit of the man’s widow and five children claiming a history of racial profiling and police harassment of African-Americans.
The SPLC description is long on outrage but a tad short on details other than it all started with the police chasing an adult son of Monroe’s into his house. It doesn’t present any reason for the police to have opened fire and that’s a bit strange even for Jim Crow era wannabes.
A quick check for news reports about the incident reveled that the police claimed to have chased the son from a suspected drug deal and that he had two prior convictions for assault and battery. The police also claim that Monroe advanced upon them with a drawn pistol. Neighbors and family at the gathering say Monroe was carrying a bottle of water and that the police planted the gun. However the gun was in fact owned by Monroe.
Hmmm. This one wouldn’t surprise me either way. I think I’ll let the law run its course without expressing any opinion.
Have you seen this? – David Plouffe
This one contains a graph from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showing how the stimulus package has apparently slowed down the loss of jobs.
My question is why are you telling ME this? Why isn’t this plastered all over every front page in the U.S.?
Tell Google: No Deal with the NSA – Anthony D. Romano
This is the ACLU complaining about the potential implications of Google approaching the NSA for help in investigating the recent cyber attacks it experienced, which may have originated in China, and to help them protect its confidential files from compromise.
The ACLU is concerned this would give the NSA access to confidential information about individuals possessed by Google despite assurances that this would not be the case.
The ACLU believes “If Google can't adequately protect its customers' personal information, it is obligated to notify them so these consumers can make informed choices about what information they provide, or the company must minimize the risk by reducing the amount and type of information it collects and retains about its customers.”
Well consider this the notification that it can’t do so without help. Personally I would never divulge information to any Internet source that I felt was sensitive. I have one credit card that I use for Internet purchases and I carefully restrict and monitor its use.
I think the ACLU is being overly paranoid here and Google is doing the right thing by asking for help.
Earn your Masters in Diplomacy – Norwich University
Diplomacy? They’ve got to be kidding.
Breathtaking Hypocrisy – Tim Kaine
The Democratic National Chairman complaining about Republican congressmen and senators who attack the stimulus package publically yet take credit for the positive effects of the package in their home districts and states.
Let’s see, politicians are hypocrites; not much of a news flash there. Again, I have to ask, why are you telling ME.
Tim is talking about a “rapid-response program to fact check every lie” and is of course asking for money to support it. You will excuse me but given the total ineptitude of the Democrats in countering Republican propaganda this would be like dropping money down a well.
First show me you’ve even vaguely capable of mounting an effective campaign and then maybe.
Dick Cheney Confessed – Becky Bond
This is Credo Action screaming that Dick Cheney admitted to being an advocate of waterboarding on ABC news and, since waterboarding is torture and a war crime, he should therefore be prosecuted.
I seem to remember saying with some regularity that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice should probably all be prosecuted, given a fair trial and then strung up from any convenient tree.
The Democrats don’t have the balls to do anything of the sort.
Well, that’s about it this time around. Not nearly as entertaining a post as I thought it might be. Maybe I’ll go work some more on that “If I were elected President idea?”
A Death in Austin
Joe Stack flew his aircraft into the IRS building in Austin, Texas. His suicide manifesto has been published on the internet and is something of an eye opener to read.
The right is calling him a socialist and just about everyone else a Tea Party type. Some Tea Party supporters are even claiming it’s all a government plot to discredit the party.
I call him paranoid.
That he got screwed on a number of occasions by the bureaucracy I have no doubt. I’d say welcome to the club. Was he right about the cozy relationships between the corporate and banking fat cats and the government? Probably, but not for the reason he thinks.
Like the Tea Party types he’s looking around for someone to blame for his hard times. The government is to blame; the politicians are to blame; the IRS is to blame. It’s everyone’s fault but his own.
In his litany of woes I see at least four catastrophic errors that he made himself.
-- He tried to “work the system” by getting some of the same tax benefits built into the code specifically for organized religion.
-- Rather than adjust to the realities of the 1986 tax code update, he tried to buck the system which is usually an effort in futility
-- He moved to Austin despite it being a poor area for the type of work he wanted to do.
-- He assumed he didn’t have to file a tax return because he felt he had no income.
Note that I say “the type of work he wanted to do.” He doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy that understood the meaning of the word “compromise.” He clearly wanted things to be his way or no way at all.
Clearly some professional help was in order to help him cope. By the way, where did he get the plane?
Bailouts are a tough nut to swallow. One wants to take the position “you screwed up” so “you pay the piper.” The problem is it’s usually NOT the people who actually screwed up that pay for it.
Trust me, the CEO and CFO have their asses covered and even if a relatively high placed executive here or there gets the ax, they’re just the current sacrificial lamb and probably have enough of a severance package that the pain gets dulled.
The folks who pay the penalty are the rank and file workers as the company makes “painful cuts” in order to “get costs under control.” So, saving the neck of the fat cat executives is usually a side effect of a bailout. The real objective is to protect the jobs of the rank and file employees.
Even with all that being said, it can be hard to watch your hard earned tax dollars being used for the bailout while you’re getting the shaft yourself.
For all those idiots on the internet praising Stack as a hero, I say grow up already. Stack’s suicide isn’t going to change anything.
The right is calling him a socialist and just about everyone else a Tea Party type. Some Tea Party supporters are even claiming it’s all a government plot to discredit the party.
I call him paranoid.
That he got screwed on a number of occasions by the bureaucracy I have no doubt. I’d say welcome to the club. Was he right about the cozy relationships between the corporate and banking fat cats and the government? Probably, but not for the reason he thinks.
Like the Tea Party types he’s looking around for someone to blame for his hard times. The government is to blame; the politicians are to blame; the IRS is to blame. It’s everyone’s fault but his own.
In his litany of woes I see at least four catastrophic errors that he made himself.
-- He tried to “work the system” by getting some of the same tax benefits built into the code specifically for organized religion.
-- Rather than adjust to the realities of the 1986 tax code update, he tried to buck the system which is usually an effort in futility
-- He moved to Austin despite it being a poor area for the type of work he wanted to do.
-- He assumed he didn’t have to file a tax return because he felt he had no income.
Note that I say “the type of work he wanted to do.” He doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy that understood the meaning of the word “compromise.” He clearly wanted things to be his way or no way at all.
Clearly some professional help was in order to help him cope. By the way, where did he get the plane?
Bailouts are a tough nut to swallow. One wants to take the position “you screwed up” so “you pay the piper.” The problem is it’s usually NOT the people who actually screwed up that pay for it.
Trust me, the CEO and CFO have their asses covered and even if a relatively high placed executive here or there gets the ax, they’re just the current sacrificial lamb and probably have enough of a severance package that the pain gets dulled.
The folks who pay the penalty are the rank and file workers as the company makes “painful cuts” in order to “get costs under control.” So, saving the neck of the fat cat executives is usually a side effect of a bailout. The real objective is to protect the jobs of the rank and file employees.
Even with all that being said, it can be hard to watch your hard earned tax dollars being used for the bailout while you’re getting the shaft yourself.
For all those idiots on the internet praising Stack as a hero, I say grow up already. Stack’s suicide isn’t going to change anything.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Fundies say the Darndest Things
Fundies say the Darndest Things (FSTDT) is a web site. On it you can find a compilation of statements made by fundamentalist Christians. It has two companion sites called Racists say the Darndest Things (RSTDT) and Conspiracy theorists say the Darndest Things (CSTDT) but FSTDT is the money site.
Some of the stuff that pops up there is frightening. All the quotes have citations so you can go back and check the original. Some of the quotes are from well known people. Quotes from Andy Schafly and his mom, Ken Ham, Kent Hovind, Ray Comfort and Pat Robertson appear with some regularity. But most of the quotes come from people that frequent the forums around the Internet.
Some of the people quoted I actually know from my days at the now defunct General Apologetics on Christian Forums and that’s really scary.
The themes repeat themselves in various forms and various degrees of absurdity and ignorance. If you explore the archives you will find rants associated with the following topics.
Evolution
Evolution is clearly the #1 fundy demon. You can find a constant stream of assertions to the effect that evolution is false, evolution hasn’t been proven, all the physical evidence contradicts evolution and evolution violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
All of the assertions are of course incorrect and most demonstrate not only an ignorance of evolution but of the facts, science, logic and history. What is clear is that these people will accept and repeat the most inane statements as long as those statements support their preconceived truth.
One of the problems is that most of them appear incapable of differentiating between evolution, abiogenesis, cosmology and atheism.
Abortion
Abortion is clearly their #2 demon. The big problem here is they don’t seem to understand the issue. The accuse people of being “in favor” of abortion.
No one is “in favor” of abortion.
The primary question is whether abortion can ever be justified. Depending upon how you answer that question determines where the conversation goes. Some fundies actually will answer “No, abortion is never justified.” This strikes me as an irrational position.
I would say that abortion MAY be justified in cases of rape, incest, where the mother’s life or health is endangered by the pregnancy and when the fetus is genetically or physically flawed to the point where any rational quality of life is impossible.
Please notice that I said MAY. The fact of the matter is that it’s not my decision. If the mother chooses to risk her life in order to bring a fetus to term, decides to keep the child of her rapist or accepts having to care for a genetically flawed offspring, then she is entitled to make that decision.
Pam Tebow chose to risk her health and life in order to carry Tim Tebow to term; Sarah Palin chose to carry a Down’s syndrome child to term and I respect those decisions.
I would not presume to dictate that any woman, under any circumstances, must abort a pregnancy and neither should anyone else.
However, the reverse must also be recognized. Just as no one can dictate that an abortion must occur, neither can anyone dictate that a woman must take a fetus to term if she feels there are good and valid reasons not to.
Despite the right wing crap flying around, abortions aren’t done on a whim. It’s a soul wrenching decision that is, in the overwhelming majority of cases, taken only as an absolute last resort.
Are many abortion decisions based upon economic reasons rather than health reasons? Yes, I’m sure they are. Is that the wrong thing to do? Perhaps, but I don’t have the right to enforce my view upon someone else. It’s not my decision.
And that’s where the battle lines are drawn. It’s just simply not someone else’s decision when an abortion is necessary. It is solely the decision of the woman involved. As for the rights of the husband, if the woman is married, or the parents, if the woman is a minor, those are conversations for another time.
Homosexuality
This one seems to be the #3 demon. As far as your average neighborhood fundy is concerned homosexuality is a lifestyle choice that God hates.
Occasionally you will encounter a fundy that might almost accept that it’s not a choice, but then their position is that it must be suppressed. It’s ok to have homosexual desires as long as you don’t give in to them.
They are also totally convinced that one can be “cured” of homosexuality through what is known as “Reparative Therapy” despite the opinion of most psychiatric and psychology experts.
Let’s not even talk about gay marriage. Fundies think homosexuality should be outlawed with penalties ranging from forced reparative therapy to summary execution.
Other Religions
Fundies appear to despise and will disparage virtually every other religion but recently Islam has become their main target.
I assume this is because most fundies are of the American right wing airhead variety and view Islam as “the enemy.”
The fact that most of them know absolutely nothing about Islam and can’t differentiate between religious and cultural aspects doesn’t keep them from criticizing Islam in general, all Muslims and the prophet Muhammad with the most vile and ignorant accusations you can imagine.
I’ll admit that I have my problems with the Islamic culture and Islam itself but these yokels are way over the top. They also have no understanding of history. I’ve seen more than one accusation thrown against Saladin who was probably, making allowances for the barbarity of his times, the most chivalrous Paladin that ever existed.
Global Warming
They hate the whole idea of Global Warming and consider it a big hoax. Exactly why this is the case is unclear. Possibilities include this is what the fat cat Republicans say so it must be true, Al Gore thinks it’s true so it must be false and God is in charge not man so it can’t be true.
Socialism
They don’t know what it is, but they know they hate it.
I got something of a new insight from a recent post. Someone pointed out that public schools were actually “Socialism” and the fundy replied that they couldn’t be because they weren’t persecuting her.
WTF? Has someone been telling fundies that Socialism = Christian persecution? It wouldn’t surprise me since most of them think they're being persecuted whenever they’re not allowed to shove their religion and their idea of morality down everyone else’s throat.
Certain People
In general fundies hate anyone who disagrees with them but certain individuals and groups come in for special attention.
Barack Obama heads the list. They hate him with a venom that is shocking at times. Fundies have called him a closet Muslim, a foreigner, someone who hates America, someone who is planning to destroy the American economy and the anti-christ.
Following not far behind poor Barack are atheists, liberals, scientists and the ACLU. I’m proud of the fact that I’m a member of all of those four groups they hate and I voted for Obama and will most likely vote for him again.
Those are the biggies. It is absolutely amazing the amount of pure ignorance contained in these posts but perhaps the biggest eye opener is the “facts” they make up. Everything from “the bible has been demonstrated to be 97% accurate” to “liberals tend to be fatter than conservatives.”
Needless to say there is never any citation to back up their assertions because the assertions are invariably flat out not true. I have no idea what the hell “97% accurate” means but it’s easy enough to verify that the liberal Blue States have a significantly lower obesity rate than the conservative Red States as well as lower crime rates and murder rates.
If I had to generalize I would say that these people have no idea of the difference between opinion and fact, have no particular problem with making things up to meet their needs and no particular problem with redefining history to meet their needs.
The crusades are an embarrassment? No problem, convert it into Christians helping the Jews defend their lands against Muslim invaders.
The founding fathers devised a secular constitution? No problem, assert that, despite all of the writings to the contrary, they based it upon “Christian principles” whatever the hell they are.
If something supports their opinion, they accept it as true without any need for verification. If it contradicts their opinion, they will rationalize it away or simply reject it out of hand.
These people call themselves patriots yet would gleefully scrap the most fundamental principles of American Democracy.
If they had their way the Separation of Church and State, which they claim is a hoax foisted upon the country by liberals, religious freedom and equal protection under the law would all be suppressed in favor of their theocratic authoritarianism.
Christian prayer would return to the schools, Christianity would be the official religion, homosexuals would go back in the closet, atheists denied fundamental political rights and women would again be forced to rely upon back ally quacks when an abortion was necessary. Or at least poor women would; rich ones could always take a short vacation to Canada.
These people would just be ludicrous clowns if one of our major political parties wasn’t bending over backwards to gain their support. That makes them potentially dangerous. The Republicans are playing a risky game. They think they can control these fruitcakes and exploit them for their votes.
Well, perhaps they can, but the German industrialists thought the same thing about Hitler. The one thing the fundies lack, the one thing that could make them a serious threat to American Democracy is a charismatic leader. This leader wouldn’t have to be a fundy, just be able to convince them he was.
Some of the stuff that pops up there is frightening. All the quotes have citations so you can go back and check the original. Some of the quotes are from well known people. Quotes from Andy Schafly and his mom, Ken Ham, Kent Hovind, Ray Comfort and Pat Robertson appear with some regularity. But most of the quotes come from people that frequent the forums around the Internet.
Some of the people quoted I actually know from my days at the now defunct General Apologetics on Christian Forums and that’s really scary.
The themes repeat themselves in various forms and various degrees of absurdity and ignorance. If you explore the archives you will find rants associated with the following topics.
Evolution
Evolution is clearly the #1 fundy demon. You can find a constant stream of assertions to the effect that evolution is false, evolution hasn’t been proven, all the physical evidence contradicts evolution and evolution violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
All of the assertions are of course incorrect and most demonstrate not only an ignorance of evolution but of the facts, science, logic and history. What is clear is that these people will accept and repeat the most inane statements as long as those statements support their preconceived truth.
One of the problems is that most of them appear incapable of differentiating between evolution, abiogenesis, cosmology and atheism.
Abortion
Abortion is clearly their #2 demon. The big problem here is they don’t seem to understand the issue. The accuse people of being “in favor” of abortion.
No one is “in favor” of abortion.
The primary question is whether abortion can ever be justified. Depending upon how you answer that question determines where the conversation goes. Some fundies actually will answer “No, abortion is never justified.” This strikes me as an irrational position.
I would say that abortion MAY be justified in cases of rape, incest, where the mother’s life or health is endangered by the pregnancy and when the fetus is genetically or physically flawed to the point where any rational quality of life is impossible.
Please notice that I said MAY. The fact of the matter is that it’s not my decision. If the mother chooses to risk her life in order to bring a fetus to term, decides to keep the child of her rapist or accepts having to care for a genetically flawed offspring, then she is entitled to make that decision.
Pam Tebow chose to risk her health and life in order to carry Tim Tebow to term; Sarah Palin chose to carry a Down’s syndrome child to term and I respect those decisions.
I would not presume to dictate that any woman, under any circumstances, must abort a pregnancy and neither should anyone else.
However, the reverse must also be recognized. Just as no one can dictate that an abortion must occur, neither can anyone dictate that a woman must take a fetus to term if she feels there are good and valid reasons not to.
Despite the right wing crap flying around, abortions aren’t done on a whim. It’s a soul wrenching decision that is, in the overwhelming majority of cases, taken only as an absolute last resort.
Are many abortion decisions based upon economic reasons rather than health reasons? Yes, I’m sure they are. Is that the wrong thing to do? Perhaps, but I don’t have the right to enforce my view upon someone else. It’s not my decision.
And that’s where the battle lines are drawn. It’s just simply not someone else’s decision when an abortion is necessary. It is solely the decision of the woman involved. As for the rights of the husband, if the woman is married, or the parents, if the woman is a minor, those are conversations for another time.
Homosexuality
This one seems to be the #3 demon. As far as your average neighborhood fundy is concerned homosexuality is a lifestyle choice that God hates.
Occasionally you will encounter a fundy that might almost accept that it’s not a choice, but then their position is that it must be suppressed. It’s ok to have homosexual desires as long as you don’t give in to them.
They are also totally convinced that one can be “cured” of homosexuality through what is known as “Reparative Therapy” despite the opinion of most psychiatric and psychology experts.
Let’s not even talk about gay marriage. Fundies think homosexuality should be outlawed with penalties ranging from forced reparative therapy to summary execution.
Other Religions
Fundies appear to despise and will disparage virtually every other religion but recently Islam has become their main target.
I assume this is because most fundies are of the American right wing airhead variety and view Islam as “the enemy.”
The fact that most of them know absolutely nothing about Islam and can’t differentiate between religious and cultural aspects doesn’t keep them from criticizing Islam in general, all Muslims and the prophet Muhammad with the most vile and ignorant accusations you can imagine.
I’ll admit that I have my problems with the Islamic culture and Islam itself but these yokels are way over the top. They also have no understanding of history. I’ve seen more than one accusation thrown against Saladin who was probably, making allowances for the barbarity of his times, the most chivalrous Paladin that ever existed.
Global Warming
They hate the whole idea of Global Warming and consider it a big hoax. Exactly why this is the case is unclear. Possibilities include this is what the fat cat Republicans say so it must be true, Al Gore thinks it’s true so it must be false and God is in charge not man so it can’t be true.
Socialism
They don’t know what it is, but they know they hate it.
I got something of a new insight from a recent post. Someone pointed out that public schools were actually “Socialism” and the fundy replied that they couldn’t be because they weren’t persecuting her.
WTF? Has someone been telling fundies that Socialism = Christian persecution? It wouldn’t surprise me since most of them think they're being persecuted whenever they’re not allowed to shove their religion and their idea of morality down everyone else’s throat.
Certain People
In general fundies hate anyone who disagrees with them but certain individuals and groups come in for special attention.
Barack Obama heads the list. They hate him with a venom that is shocking at times. Fundies have called him a closet Muslim, a foreigner, someone who hates America, someone who is planning to destroy the American economy and the anti-christ.
Following not far behind poor Barack are atheists, liberals, scientists and the ACLU. I’m proud of the fact that I’m a member of all of those four groups they hate and I voted for Obama and will most likely vote for him again.
Those are the biggies. It is absolutely amazing the amount of pure ignorance contained in these posts but perhaps the biggest eye opener is the “facts” they make up. Everything from “the bible has been demonstrated to be 97% accurate” to “liberals tend to be fatter than conservatives.”
Needless to say there is never any citation to back up their assertions because the assertions are invariably flat out not true. I have no idea what the hell “97% accurate” means but it’s easy enough to verify that the liberal Blue States have a significantly lower obesity rate than the conservative Red States as well as lower crime rates and murder rates.
If I had to generalize I would say that these people have no idea of the difference between opinion and fact, have no particular problem with making things up to meet their needs and no particular problem with redefining history to meet their needs.
The crusades are an embarrassment? No problem, convert it into Christians helping the Jews defend their lands against Muslim invaders.
The founding fathers devised a secular constitution? No problem, assert that, despite all of the writings to the contrary, they based it upon “Christian principles” whatever the hell they are.
If something supports their opinion, they accept it as true without any need for verification. If it contradicts their opinion, they will rationalize it away or simply reject it out of hand.
These people call themselves patriots yet would gleefully scrap the most fundamental principles of American Democracy.
If they had their way the Separation of Church and State, which they claim is a hoax foisted upon the country by liberals, religious freedom and equal protection under the law would all be suppressed in favor of their theocratic authoritarianism.
Christian prayer would return to the schools, Christianity would be the official religion, homosexuals would go back in the closet, atheists denied fundamental political rights and women would again be forced to rely upon back ally quacks when an abortion was necessary. Or at least poor women would; rich ones could always take a short vacation to Canada.
These people would just be ludicrous clowns if one of our major political parties wasn’t bending over backwards to gain their support. That makes them potentially dangerous. The Republicans are playing a risky game. They think they can control these fruitcakes and exploit them for their votes.
Well, perhaps they can, but the German industrialists thought the same thing about Hitler. The one thing the fundies lack, the one thing that could make them a serious threat to American Democracy is a charismatic leader. This leader wouldn’t have to be a fundy, just be able to convince them he was.
Monday, February 15, 2010
The Winter Olympics
I would say *yawn* except for Nodar Kumaritashvili, the Georgian Lugar killed in a practice run on Friday. To my mind the condition of that track, despite protests by Olympic officials to the contrary, was utterly unacceptable.
The officials have claimed that Nodar was “too inexperienced.” Well, if that’s the case, you should have some sort of qualifying trial before allowing someone onto a potentially deadly course.
No matter how you spin it, the Olympic and Luge officials, who should have been the older and wiser heads, failed in their responsibility. The fact that changes have in fact been made to the track speaks for itself. This should have been a great time in Nodar’s life. His death saddens me beyond any ability of mine to express.
As for the Olympics themselves, I’m not much of a fan. I never cared much for the Winter Olympics, perhaps because I never participated in any of the sports being played. I used to like the Summer Olympics more than I do now. I guess I’ve just gotten bored with the whole thing.
This is not to say they aren’t a great event, laden with the potential for great drama, they’re just not my cup of tea I guess.
The officials have claimed that Nodar was “too inexperienced.” Well, if that’s the case, you should have some sort of qualifying trial before allowing someone onto a potentially deadly course.
No matter how you spin it, the Olympic and Luge officials, who should have been the older and wiser heads, failed in their responsibility. The fact that changes have in fact been made to the track speaks for itself. This should have been a great time in Nodar’s life. His death saddens me beyond any ability of mine to express.
As for the Olympics themselves, I’m not much of a fan. I never cared much for the Winter Olympics, perhaps because I never participated in any of the sports being played. I used to like the Summer Olympics more than I do now. I guess I’ve just gotten bored with the whole thing.
This is not to say they aren’t a great event, laden with the potential for great drama, they’re just not my cup of tea I guess.
Monday, February 08, 2010
The Great Derangement
I finished “Idiot America” and now I’m reading Matt Taibbi’s “The Great Derangement.” It’s a tad dated but I think it will be an interesting read.
One point that Taibbi makes early on is that the various factions in the American political landscape don’t have a common set of facts to work from.
The implication is if we disagree on the simplest thing, the fundamental facts, how are we ever going to agree on complex issues like policies?
While I agree that working from a different understanding of the facts makes things difficult, I’m not sure this is a change. Did Americans ever agree on a common set of facts?
Somehow I doubt it.
I think I’ll wait and see how Taibbi develops this theme before commenting further.
One point that Taibbi makes early on is that the various factions in the American political landscape don’t have a common set of facts to work from.
The implication is if we disagree on the simplest thing, the fundamental facts, how are we ever going to agree on complex issues like policies?
While I agree that working from a different understanding of the facts makes things difficult, I’m not sure this is a change. Did Americans ever agree on a common set of facts?
Somehow I doubt it.
I think I’ll wait and see how Taibbi develops this theme before commenting further.
Super Bowl XLIV
Of course I picked the Colts. I guess that’s why I’m not working as a football analyst.
I was riding high in the first quarter with the Colts up 10-0. The onside kick at the start of the 2nd half fooled me as well as everyone else. If the Colts had recovered and scored to make it 17-6, I’m convinced they would have won. Instead it was the Saints that recovered and made it 13-10.
The fact that Manning managed a drive to temporarily retake the lead 17-13 was irrelevant. That onside kick won the game.
When it works you’re a genius. If it hadn’t worked, Shawn Peyton would have been crucified by the sports pundits.
Anyway, final score Saints 31, Colts 17 so I end up with a losing record this year in NFL playoff predictions 5-6. Guess I’ll keep my day job.
As for the Pam and Tim Tebow commercial, it didn't even make a whole lot of sense to me. If I didn't know the story ahead of time, I wouldn't know what the hell they were talking about. When it started, I actually thought at first it was a continuation of the commercial with Betty White and Abe Vigoda that had preceded it.
I doubt too many of the NFL fans rushed to the Focus on the Family web site, as they were invited to, in order to get the whole Pam and Tim Tebow story.
I was riding high in the first quarter with the Colts up 10-0. The onside kick at the start of the 2nd half fooled me as well as everyone else. If the Colts had recovered and scored to make it 17-6, I’m convinced they would have won. Instead it was the Saints that recovered and made it 13-10.
The fact that Manning managed a drive to temporarily retake the lead 17-13 was irrelevant. That onside kick won the game.
When it works you’re a genius. If it hadn’t worked, Shawn Peyton would have been crucified by the sports pundits.
Anyway, final score Saints 31, Colts 17 so I end up with a losing record this year in NFL playoff predictions 5-6. Guess I’ll keep my day job.
As for the Pam and Tim Tebow commercial, it didn't even make a whole lot of sense to me. If I didn't know the story ahead of time, I wouldn't know what the hell they were talking about. When it started, I actually thought at first it was a continuation of the commercial with Betty White and Abe Vigoda that had preceded it.
I doubt too many of the NFL fans rushed to the Focus on the Family web site, as they were invited to, in order to get the whole Pam and Tim Tebow story.
Friday, February 05, 2010
The Department of Education
I had a bit of a shock the other day while considering the issues being highlighted by the Tea Party that I couldn’t really say what the hell the Department of Education, an agency some Tea Party supporters are proposing we abolish, actually did.
The good news is that this is the Age of the Internet so I surfed on over to the DOE website. There I read the Mission Statement, the “What we Do” page, the “What we don’t Do” page and perused the list of assorted programs.
As far as I can tell the DOE does three primary things. It provides money in the form of grants and loans for education, it enforces laws against discrimination in programs that receive federal funds and it measures the performance of schools through the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
Overall it sounds like it’s primarily in the business of taking money from John and Paul and giving it to Jim. One has to wonder how one can do that when the money from John and Paul has already been spoken for. So perhaps more accurately, the DOE borrows money from China and lends it to American students and school districts while eating some of it for providing the service.
The DOE claims its mission is:
“The mission of the Department of Education is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.”
Well, I’d say based upon where American students stack up against students from other countries and the typical disparities between whites and blacks in the U.S. they’re not exactly doing a bang up job now are they?
They also apparently run the federal college student loan program. I’ve had the dubious pleasure of filling out a FAFSA (Free Application for Student Aid) form so that’s not going win any sympathy from me.
The discretionary budget for the DOE is around $50 billion. A mere drop in the bucket these days perhaps but it still represents about $166 from each of us. I’m sort of wondering whether I could do something better with that $166?
That would cover 92% of my World of Warcraft subscription.
They also administer Pell Grants which are outright gifts to college students to cover tuition and other expenses rather than loans. Pell Grants do not have to be paid back.
Some of the appropriations read like a satire. Check this one out.
$3.5 billion over 7 years for a College Access and Completion Fund, which would make grants to States, institutions of higher education, and other organizations to support innovative strategies to increase the number and percentage of students entering and completing college.
What’s wrong with this picture? Here I always thought that college was something just about everyone wanted to enter and complete, if they were capable of doing so, and that usually it was MONEY that was standing in the way. How about using this money to REDUCE TUITION COSTS! That would work.
I also notice funding appropriated for simplifying the FAFSA. NOW you’re going to simplify it?
I’m going to take a wild guess here and say that the DOE probably hasn’t come close to providing me adequate value for the money it has cost me in taxes over the years. More than likely it has siphoned money away from myself, my town and my family and spent it on maintaining itself and on other people, towns and families.
I suspect we can do without most of what this agency does. The more I read about this place the more a picture forms in my mind of self important political appointees leading a bunch of know nothing bureaucrats around and not accomplishing a whole lot other than killing trees and spending money.
Of course, I could be wrong.
I must be in a bad mood. I mean, I work for a living. I’m not sure why I should be contributing to a program like the “College Access and Completion Fund.” Hell, if you don’t want to go, or can’t cut it, go flip burgers at Mickey D’s.
Here’s another one.
$123.3 million for Developing Hispanic-serving Institutions, an increase of 5 percent, to help ensure that Hispanic students, half of whom enroll in Hispanic-serving institutions, have access to high quality postsecondary education.
WTF is a “Hispanic-serving Institution” and why do we need to develop them? Can’t they just attend the same old local colleges that everyone else attends? Why do they need “Hispanic-serving Institutions?” Whatever the f--k they are.
I sort of sympathize with blacks because (1) most of their ancestors got dragged over here against their will and (2) I remember segregation and the 1950’s. I don’t have that same kind of empathy for Hispanics. I’m not even sure why Hispanics are a “minority” and Italians, Irish, Germans and god damned Danes aren’t. I’m an Austrian-Italian mutt. Where do I go and apply for my minority benefits?
Wow, here I am, racist in training.
I’m really not. I just don’t understand how it’s decided who needs special help, who doesn’t and what that special help is. Who is reviewing the effectiveness and benefits of these kinds of programs? I sort of get the feeling that once a program gets going, it becomes increasing hard to shut it down as time goes by regardless of whether or not it’s accomplishing anything that justifies the money being spent.
I think if I was ever elected president (heaven forbid), the first thing I would do is have a team of people review the value of every ongoing program in any agency and shut down the ones that weren’t returning an adequate return for the investment.
Luckily I’m not about to be elected president anytime soon but it does give me an idea for an interesting post entitled “If I were Elected President.” Think I’ll go work on that one.
The good news is that this is the Age of the Internet so I surfed on over to the DOE website. There I read the Mission Statement, the “What we Do” page, the “What we don’t Do” page and perused the list of assorted programs.
As far as I can tell the DOE does three primary things. It provides money in the form of grants and loans for education, it enforces laws against discrimination in programs that receive federal funds and it measures the performance of schools through the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
Overall it sounds like it’s primarily in the business of taking money from John and Paul and giving it to Jim. One has to wonder how one can do that when the money from John and Paul has already been spoken for. So perhaps more accurately, the DOE borrows money from China and lends it to American students and school districts while eating some of it for providing the service.
The DOE claims its mission is:
“The mission of the Department of Education is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.”
Well, I’d say based upon where American students stack up against students from other countries and the typical disparities between whites and blacks in the U.S. they’re not exactly doing a bang up job now are they?
They also apparently run the federal college student loan program. I’ve had the dubious pleasure of filling out a FAFSA (Free Application for Student Aid) form so that’s not going win any sympathy from me.
The discretionary budget for the DOE is around $50 billion. A mere drop in the bucket these days perhaps but it still represents about $166 from each of us. I’m sort of wondering whether I could do something better with that $166?
That would cover 92% of my World of Warcraft subscription.
They also administer Pell Grants which are outright gifts to college students to cover tuition and other expenses rather than loans. Pell Grants do not have to be paid back.
Some of the appropriations read like a satire. Check this one out.
$3.5 billion over 7 years for a College Access and Completion Fund, which would make grants to States, institutions of higher education, and other organizations to support innovative strategies to increase the number and percentage of students entering and completing college.
What’s wrong with this picture? Here I always thought that college was something just about everyone wanted to enter and complete, if they were capable of doing so, and that usually it was MONEY that was standing in the way. How about using this money to REDUCE TUITION COSTS! That would work.
I also notice funding appropriated for simplifying the FAFSA. NOW you’re going to simplify it?
I’m going to take a wild guess here and say that the DOE probably hasn’t come close to providing me adequate value for the money it has cost me in taxes over the years. More than likely it has siphoned money away from myself, my town and my family and spent it on maintaining itself and on other people, towns and families.
I suspect we can do without most of what this agency does. The more I read about this place the more a picture forms in my mind of self important political appointees leading a bunch of know nothing bureaucrats around and not accomplishing a whole lot other than killing trees and spending money.
Of course, I could be wrong.
I must be in a bad mood. I mean, I work for a living. I’m not sure why I should be contributing to a program like the “College Access and Completion Fund.” Hell, if you don’t want to go, or can’t cut it, go flip burgers at Mickey D’s.
Here’s another one.
$123.3 million for Developing Hispanic-serving Institutions, an increase of 5 percent, to help ensure that Hispanic students, half of whom enroll in Hispanic-serving institutions, have access to high quality postsecondary education.
WTF is a “Hispanic-serving Institution” and why do we need to develop them? Can’t they just attend the same old local colleges that everyone else attends? Why do they need “Hispanic-serving Institutions?” Whatever the f--k they are.
I sort of sympathize with blacks because (1) most of their ancestors got dragged over here against their will and (2) I remember segregation and the 1950’s. I don’t have that same kind of empathy for Hispanics. I’m not even sure why Hispanics are a “minority” and Italians, Irish, Germans and god damned Danes aren’t. I’m an Austrian-Italian mutt. Where do I go and apply for my minority benefits?
Wow, here I am, racist in training.
I’m really not. I just don’t understand how it’s decided who needs special help, who doesn’t and what that special help is. Who is reviewing the effectiveness and benefits of these kinds of programs? I sort of get the feeling that once a program gets going, it becomes increasing hard to shut it down as time goes by regardless of whether or not it’s accomplishing anything that justifies the money being spent.
I think if I was ever elected president (heaven forbid), the first thing I would do is have a team of people review the value of every ongoing program in any agency and shut down the ones that weren’t returning an adequate return for the investment.
Luckily I’m not about to be elected president anytime soon but it does give me an idea for an interesting post entitled “If I were Elected President.” Think I’ll go work on that one.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
Contract from America
The Tea Party types are putting together what they call a “Contract from America” which strikes me very much like a party platform. I think it is essentially sending the message “these are the things we’d like done.”
They are currently in the process of winnowing down the ideas submitted into a more focused list. I’ve listed the 20 highest rated ideas, with commentary, below. I have corrected the spelling and English usage errors in the list.
Implement the Fair Tax 8692 rating
This idea has a lot of attractive elements to it. If nothing else it would significantly simplify taxes. The problem is there are lots of question about both the impact and the effectiveness of this type of tax.
Basically this idea eliminates the income tax in favor of what amounts to a tax upon consumption. It’s not a true sales tax because it includes an ongoing rebate (or prebate as proponents call it) that would effectively eliminate any taxes on people spending under the poverty level. As a matter of fact, in some cases, it could even be a negative tax where poor families would receive more in rebate payments than they paid in taxes.
The problem is that not everyone agrees the tax would work as advertised and there is concern that it may be vulnerable to fraud. Taxing would occur only once at the final sale for consumption, therefore the fear is that it might be possible to side step tax payments by disguising the purchase as an intermediary one. Also, can you spell Black Market? Think about the cross state trafficking in cigarettes.
I think this is a very complicated area and, while the Fair Tax is attractive for a number of reasons, it’s unclear to me whether it’s a good idea. - Uncertain
Legislation shall contain no unrelated amendments 4411 rating
No more “riders” tacked onto bills spending money on questionable or favorite causes. I agree with this 100%. - Agree
Congressional Term Limits 3906 rating
Absolutely agree with this 100%. - Agree
Abolish the Department of Education 3466 rating
Since I’m not 100% certain what the Department of Education does I’m at something of a loss to decide whether or not this is a good witch or a bad witch. I noticed that some of the morons commenting on this idea seem to think it would allow the states to re-institute school prayers. Clearly they don’t understand how things work.
The bottom line is I’m uncertain about this one. - Uncertain
Pass Nationwide Medical Malpractice Tort Reform 3081 rating
I absolutely agree with this 100%. - Agree
Congress shall not exempt themselves 2908 rating
I absolutely agree with this 100%. If it’s good enough for the meandering herd, then it’s good enough for those bozos as well - Agree
No lifetime salary or benefits for Congress 2876 rating
Basically you get paid for the time you serve and that’s it. This works very well in conjunction with term limits. – Agree
An Official Language of the United States 2856 rating
I agree. English should the official language. I grind my teeth every time I’m told to “press 1 for English.” - Agree
Drill Here, Drill Now 2828 rating
It’s highly debatable that this is going to solve anything. The guy that submitted this seems to think we have massive untapped oil reserves. This just flat out isn’t true. Better would be to find alternative and renewable sources. - Oppose
Interstate Health Insurance Competition 2732 rating
Why the hell not is what I say. Competition invariable leads to benefits for the consumer. – Agree
Cite Constitutional authority for creating laws 2207 rating
Anyone can rationalize anything. This wouldn’t accomplish anything. Someone can always come up with a creative explanation. If you doubt that, just check out Christian Apologetics. So this isn’t a bad idea, it’s just worthless. - Oppose
Nuclear Energy, reduce our dependence on foreign oil 1690 rating
Assuming the appropriate safeguards are in place and we have a way to dispose of all that nuclear waste, maybe. I’d like to understand a little more about the implications of this. - Uncertain
More Drilling for Natural Gas and Oil, Increase Nuclear Energy, and eliminate federal regulation and give power back to the states 1075 rating
This is sort of a combination of the two previous ideas. I seriously doubt we currently have the oil reserves to resolve the issue and I find nuclear energy questionable as a solution. - Uncertain
Federal Spending Limitations - Budget Cap 942 rating
It’s probably not a good idea to try and see too far into the future and I get the feeling this is what this idea is trying to do. On the other hand, as long as there is adequate leeway for addressing emergencies then this might be a good idea. I think it’s more complicated than it sounds however and I’d need more details. – Uncertain
2nd Amendment Rights 938 rating
I’ll let you have all the guns you want as long as bullets are restricted to target ranges and hunting preserves. – Opposed
Presidential advisers (czars) shall have no regulatory authority 899 rating
I agree with this. Advisors should be just that, advisors. Only elected officials should have regulatory power. – Agree
Bills from the House or Senate are to be Made Public 7 Days Before any Vote 836 rating
All bills are already posted and can be accessed easily from the Internet. The problem is you have to know the bill exists and its designation. I think we need a more streamlined and easy to access system. If that’s what this means, then I’m all for it. – Agree
Post all government expenditures on the Internet 575 rating
Some government expenditures are classified and have to be classified. Besides, if you post all the bills, which would include appropriations bills, this sort of becomes redundant. – Oppose
Hands OFF the Internet 472 rating
I agree 100%. – Agree
Abolish the Department of Energy. 439 rating
Like the Department of Education, I’m not certain what this department does so it’s hard for me to judge. – Uncertain
So I agree with 10, disagree with 4 and I’m uncertain about 6. In general I think all of these ideas are underestimating the complexity associated with the issue. They’re ideas that would like to grow up to be concepts that can then be matured into plans. The devil is in the details and there is usually a lot of work to be done between the idea phase and when implementation begins.
I also think some of the support is based upon unrealistic expectations as well as a misunderstanding of who controls what in some cases. Eliminating the Department of Education isn’t going to allow restoring school prayer, teaching creationism or resurrecting segregation. The Constitution isn’t going away.
I think the general consensus is if it isn’t effective, then eliminate it. However one needs to be careful that one doesn’t get a totally unexpected and unpleasant result. Just because you’re not aware of it doesn’t mean an agency isn’t performing some vital service. Often the quietest agencies are the most effective.
Still, at least 10, and possibly 16, of the ideas strike me as having merit and I’m willing to be convinced on 3 of the 4 I opposed. No one is ever going to convince me that we need unrestricted gun ownership or any gun ownership at all for that matter.
The real danger here is having a group of people, who don’t understand the complexities of the situation, trying to dictate simple minded solutions and then becoming enraged when things get bogged down due to the complexities they overlooked. On the other hand, maybe some of these things are in fact as simple as they look.
They are currently in the process of winnowing down the ideas submitted into a more focused list. I’ve listed the 20 highest rated ideas, with commentary, below. I have corrected the spelling and English usage errors in the list.
Implement the Fair Tax 8692 rating
This idea has a lot of attractive elements to it. If nothing else it would significantly simplify taxes. The problem is there are lots of question about both the impact and the effectiveness of this type of tax.
Basically this idea eliminates the income tax in favor of what amounts to a tax upon consumption. It’s not a true sales tax because it includes an ongoing rebate (or prebate as proponents call it) that would effectively eliminate any taxes on people spending under the poverty level. As a matter of fact, in some cases, it could even be a negative tax where poor families would receive more in rebate payments than they paid in taxes.
The problem is that not everyone agrees the tax would work as advertised and there is concern that it may be vulnerable to fraud. Taxing would occur only once at the final sale for consumption, therefore the fear is that it might be possible to side step tax payments by disguising the purchase as an intermediary one. Also, can you spell Black Market? Think about the cross state trafficking in cigarettes.
I think this is a very complicated area and, while the Fair Tax is attractive for a number of reasons, it’s unclear to me whether it’s a good idea. - Uncertain
Legislation shall contain no unrelated amendments 4411 rating
No more “riders” tacked onto bills spending money on questionable or favorite causes. I agree with this 100%. - Agree
Congressional Term Limits 3906 rating
Absolutely agree with this 100%. - Agree
Abolish the Department of Education 3466 rating
Since I’m not 100% certain what the Department of Education does I’m at something of a loss to decide whether or not this is a good witch or a bad witch. I noticed that some of the morons commenting on this idea seem to think it would allow the states to re-institute school prayers. Clearly they don’t understand how things work.
The bottom line is I’m uncertain about this one. - Uncertain
Pass Nationwide Medical Malpractice Tort Reform 3081 rating
I absolutely agree with this 100%. - Agree
Congress shall not exempt themselves 2908 rating
I absolutely agree with this 100%. If it’s good enough for the meandering herd, then it’s good enough for those bozos as well - Agree
No lifetime salary or benefits for Congress 2876 rating
Basically you get paid for the time you serve and that’s it. This works very well in conjunction with term limits. – Agree
An Official Language of the United States 2856 rating
I agree. English should the official language. I grind my teeth every time I’m told to “press 1 for English.” - Agree
Drill Here, Drill Now 2828 rating
It’s highly debatable that this is going to solve anything. The guy that submitted this seems to think we have massive untapped oil reserves. This just flat out isn’t true. Better would be to find alternative and renewable sources. - Oppose
Interstate Health Insurance Competition 2732 rating
Why the hell not is what I say. Competition invariable leads to benefits for the consumer. – Agree
Cite Constitutional authority for creating laws 2207 rating
Anyone can rationalize anything. This wouldn’t accomplish anything. Someone can always come up with a creative explanation. If you doubt that, just check out Christian Apologetics. So this isn’t a bad idea, it’s just worthless. - Oppose
Nuclear Energy, reduce our dependence on foreign oil 1690 rating
Assuming the appropriate safeguards are in place and we have a way to dispose of all that nuclear waste, maybe. I’d like to understand a little more about the implications of this. - Uncertain
More Drilling for Natural Gas and Oil, Increase Nuclear Energy, and eliminate federal regulation and give power back to the states 1075 rating
This is sort of a combination of the two previous ideas. I seriously doubt we currently have the oil reserves to resolve the issue and I find nuclear energy questionable as a solution. - Uncertain
Federal Spending Limitations - Budget Cap 942 rating
It’s probably not a good idea to try and see too far into the future and I get the feeling this is what this idea is trying to do. On the other hand, as long as there is adequate leeway for addressing emergencies then this might be a good idea. I think it’s more complicated than it sounds however and I’d need more details. – Uncertain
2nd Amendment Rights 938 rating
I’ll let you have all the guns you want as long as bullets are restricted to target ranges and hunting preserves. – Opposed
Presidential advisers (czars) shall have no regulatory authority 899 rating
I agree with this. Advisors should be just that, advisors. Only elected officials should have regulatory power. – Agree
Bills from the House or Senate are to be Made Public 7 Days Before any Vote 836 rating
All bills are already posted and can be accessed easily from the Internet. The problem is you have to know the bill exists and its designation. I think we need a more streamlined and easy to access system. If that’s what this means, then I’m all for it. – Agree
Post all government expenditures on the Internet 575 rating
Some government expenditures are classified and have to be classified. Besides, if you post all the bills, which would include appropriations bills, this sort of becomes redundant. – Oppose
Hands OFF the Internet 472 rating
I agree 100%. – Agree
Abolish the Department of Energy. 439 rating
Like the Department of Education, I’m not certain what this department does so it’s hard for me to judge. – Uncertain
So I agree with 10, disagree with 4 and I’m uncertain about 6. In general I think all of these ideas are underestimating the complexity associated with the issue. They’re ideas that would like to grow up to be concepts that can then be matured into plans. The devil is in the details and there is usually a lot of work to be done between the idea phase and when implementation begins.
I also think some of the support is based upon unrealistic expectations as well as a misunderstanding of who controls what in some cases. Eliminating the Department of Education isn’t going to allow restoring school prayer, teaching creationism or resurrecting segregation. The Constitution isn’t going away.
I think the general consensus is if it isn’t effective, then eliminate it. However one needs to be careful that one doesn’t get a totally unexpected and unpleasant result. Just because you’re not aware of it doesn’t mean an agency isn’t performing some vital service. Often the quietest agencies are the most effective.
Still, at least 10, and possibly 16, of the ideas strike me as having merit and I’m willing to be convinced on 3 of the 4 I opposed. No one is ever going to convince me that we need unrestricted gun ownership or any gun ownership at all for that matter.
The real danger here is having a group of people, who don’t understand the complexities of the situation, trying to dictate simple minded solutions and then becoming enraged when things get bogged down due to the complexities they overlooked. On the other hand, maybe some of these things are in fact as simple as they look.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
Paper Linking Vaccine and Autism Retracted
The major British medical journal, the Lancet, has officially issued a retraction of the Andrew Wakefield paper which claimed a possible link between autism and the MMR vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella.
The action came after an ethic judgment against Wakefield was issued last week by the British General Medical council.
For years other experts and researchers have been arguing that Wakefield’s claim was totally without merit and now the Lancet apparently agrees.
Unfortunately the damage has pretty much already been done. Based upon Wakefield’s apparently spurious claims, a whole anti-vaccination culture has evolved complete with its own celebrities.
This is a perfect example of Idiot America which unfortunately has also taken hold in Britain, Australia and New Zealand. One “celebrity component” of the anti-vaccine says her “mommy sense” knows that vaccines cause autism despite what all those silly scientists and medical experts say.
Heaven help us from ourselves.
I agree with the criticism that the Lancet should have taken some sort of official action, if only to declare the paper’s result in serious doubt, long before this.
Now we’ll see how the “mommy sense” advocates react. I’m betting there will be loud denunciations of the Lancet’s actions and cries of a witch hunt before the whole controversy slowly fades away.
Unfortunately that’s not going to bring back any of the children who have died because their parents were falsely frightened into not getting them vaccinated.
The action came after an ethic judgment against Wakefield was issued last week by the British General Medical council.
For years other experts and researchers have been arguing that Wakefield’s claim was totally without merit and now the Lancet apparently agrees.
Unfortunately the damage has pretty much already been done. Based upon Wakefield’s apparently spurious claims, a whole anti-vaccination culture has evolved complete with its own celebrities.
This is a perfect example of Idiot America which unfortunately has also taken hold in Britain, Australia and New Zealand. One “celebrity component” of the anti-vaccine says her “mommy sense” knows that vaccines cause autism despite what all those silly scientists and medical experts say.
Heaven help us from ourselves.
I agree with the criticism that the Lancet should have taken some sort of official action, if only to declare the paper’s result in serious doubt, long before this.
Now we’ll see how the “mommy sense” advocates react. I’m betting there will be loud denunciations of the Lancet’s actions and cries of a witch hunt before the whole controversy slowly fades away.
Unfortunately that’s not going to bring back any of the children who have died because their parents were falsely frightened into not getting them vaccinated.
The Budget
The budget projections coming out of the White House aren’t terribly encouraging except for one solid fact that I’m sure won’t be given the publicity and credit it deserves.
The one solid fact is that they are honest.
During the eight years of the Bush administration we got vague assurances that the budget would ultimately be balanced while the Bush tax cuts and the ill advised adventure in Iraq guaranteed they couldn’t be.
Obama is taking the position that job growth and economic stimulus take precedent over a balanced budget. I’m not 100% certain I feel comfortable with that conclusion. I would seriously like to see the justification, the projections and the math associated with it. In case you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m not one to take anybody’s word for anything without seeing the evidence for myself.
Obama should get praise; what he’ll probably get is vilification from the Republicans for a situation that is mostly their fault. However, I’m not letting the Democrats off the hook. Clearly the administration should have been singing this tune for the last year and making the point that controlling health care costs is necessary for getting the deficit under control.
I’m in favor of the proposed tax increases (although I’m sure I will find them painful), but I’m not sure they go far enough. I think the domestic budget freeze is a good idea and actually thought it was the primary good idea McCain had during the campaign.
It’s going to be painful folks. We’ve all been enjoying the party and now it’s time to pay the band.
The difficulty will be the pundits and soft shoe politicians who will lie to you and claim it isn’t necessary or that raising taxes is going to lead to a new recession. I can guarantee it’s necessary and I think it’s more likely that not taking steps to correct the deficit will lead to, not only a new recession, but a potential economic catastrophe that would make the upheaval of the Great Depression look like boom times.
The time has come to face reality, consider the facts and ignore the Right Wing morons who are about to spin up another load of nonsense for political benefit.
The president is doing what is right. The Republicans will undoubtedly react with what they think will be popular regardless of whether or not that means the country will burn.
The one solid fact is that they are honest.
During the eight years of the Bush administration we got vague assurances that the budget would ultimately be balanced while the Bush tax cuts and the ill advised adventure in Iraq guaranteed they couldn’t be.
Obama is taking the position that job growth and economic stimulus take precedent over a balanced budget. I’m not 100% certain I feel comfortable with that conclusion. I would seriously like to see the justification, the projections and the math associated with it. In case you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m not one to take anybody’s word for anything without seeing the evidence for myself.
Obama should get praise; what he’ll probably get is vilification from the Republicans for a situation that is mostly their fault. However, I’m not letting the Democrats off the hook. Clearly the administration should have been singing this tune for the last year and making the point that controlling health care costs is necessary for getting the deficit under control.
I’m in favor of the proposed tax increases (although I’m sure I will find them painful), but I’m not sure they go far enough. I think the domestic budget freeze is a good idea and actually thought it was the primary good idea McCain had during the campaign.
It’s going to be painful folks. We’ve all been enjoying the party and now it’s time to pay the band.
The difficulty will be the pundits and soft shoe politicians who will lie to you and claim it isn’t necessary or that raising taxes is going to lead to a new recession. I can guarantee it’s necessary and I think it’s more likely that not taking steps to correct the deficit will lead to, not only a new recession, but a potential economic catastrophe that would make the upheaval of the Great Depression look like boom times.
The time has come to face reality, consider the facts and ignore the Right Wing morons who are about to spin up another load of nonsense for political benefit.
The president is doing what is right. The Republicans will undoubtedly react with what they think will be popular regardless of whether or not that means the country will burn.
Monday, February 01, 2010
The Accuracy of Pam Tebow’s Abortion Tale
Some people are challenging the accuracy of Pam Tebow’s story that, after falling ill in the Philippines, she chose not to follow a doctor’s recommendation to abort the pregnancy which ultimately led to the birth of Tim.
Apparently the fly in the ointment is the fact that abortion is now, and was then, illegal in the Philippines.
Well, that may be, but the fact of the matter is that the abortion rate in the Philippines is higher than that in the U.S. and, apparently, is one of those things where the well to do can get it done safely under a doctor’s care and the not so well to do have to settle for, shall we say, a far less safe approach.
So I don’t find it at all surprising that the doctors caring for an American missionary lady could, would, and did recommend an abortion. I believe Mrs. Tebow.
Another point being made is that the commercial would be misleading if it didn’t at least include the information that abortion was illegal in the Philippines. I doubt they’ll bother since that would introduce a second rationale for the decision (fear of getting thrown in the hoosegow) in addition to pure religious fervor. Which is, I’m fairly certain, the reason the opposition wants it brought up.
I think the ad is inappropriate and CBS shouldn’t air it but I’d like to keep the argument focused on that question. I don’t think personal attacks on Tim or Pam have any place in the discussion and clearly questioning the veracity of the story is a personal attack.
Besides, as I’ve said about David and Jesus and the adulteress, even if the story isn’t true, it should be. I don’t have a problem with the story; it raises questions that we all need to consider as part of the abortion question. I just don’t think the Super Bowl is the right venue for raising those questions.
Apparently the fly in the ointment is the fact that abortion is now, and was then, illegal in the Philippines.
Well, that may be, but the fact of the matter is that the abortion rate in the Philippines is higher than that in the U.S. and, apparently, is one of those things where the well to do can get it done safely under a doctor’s care and the not so well to do have to settle for, shall we say, a far less safe approach.
So I don’t find it at all surprising that the doctors caring for an American missionary lady could, would, and did recommend an abortion. I believe Mrs. Tebow.
Another point being made is that the commercial would be misleading if it didn’t at least include the information that abortion was illegal in the Philippines. I doubt they’ll bother since that would introduce a second rationale for the decision (fear of getting thrown in the hoosegow) in addition to pure religious fervor. Which is, I’m fairly certain, the reason the opposition wants it brought up.
I think the ad is inappropriate and CBS shouldn’t air it but I’d like to keep the argument focused on that question. I don’t think personal attacks on Tim or Pam have any place in the discussion and clearly questioning the veracity of the story is a personal attack.
Besides, as I’ve said about David and Jesus and the adulteress, even if the story isn’t true, it should be. I don’t have a problem with the story; it raises questions that we all need to consider as part of the abortion question. I just don’t think the Super Bowl is the right venue for raising those questions.
Abducting Haitian Children
Well, I guess they weren’t really abducting them or so they claim. Ten certifiable American morons were arrested while trying to bus children out of Haiti without any of the necessary legal forms and permissions.
The latest “Ugly American” poster children are members of the Southern Baptist Convention from Idaho and, according to their spokesman, were “just trying to do the right thing.”
Needless to say the Haitian government is furious and insisting that the Ugly Ten be prosecuted in order to send a strong message against trafficking in children.
Haitian and U.S. official are considering a trial in the U.S. since Haiti has a few more important things to worry about than these idiots. If that’s the case, I’ll be surprised if they get more than a slap on the wrist. What they should be sentenced to do is clean out the latrines in the disaster area for about six months.
I have no sympathy for these people but they probably don’t deserve jail time for stupidity. I would like to see a hefty community service sentence that will help them to develop a little cultural sensitivity.
What am I kidding? Fundy airheads develop cultural sensitivity? I might as well ask for hell to freeze over.
The latest “Ugly American” poster children are members of the Southern Baptist Convention from Idaho and, according to their spokesman, were “just trying to do the right thing.”
Needless to say the Haitian government is furious and insisting that the Ugly Ten be prosecuted in order to send a strong message against trafficking in children.
Haitian and U.S. official are considering a trial in the U.S. since Haiti has a few more important things to worry about than these idiots. If that’s the case, I’ll be surprised if they get more than a slap on the wrist. What they should be sentenced to do is clean out the latrines in the disaster area for about six months.
I have no sympathy for these people but they probably don’t deserve jail time for stupidity. I would like to see a hefty community service sentence that will help them to develop a little cultural sensitivity.
What am I kidding? Fundy airheads develop cultural sensitivity? I might as well ask for hell to freeze over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
