"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law."
(Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 1 Whether Christianity is Part of the Common Law (1764). Published in The Works of Thomas Jefferson in Twelve Volumes, Federal Edition, Paul Leicester Ford, ed., New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1904, p. 459.)
Monday, February 17, 2014
President's Day Good Words #2
"I read my eyes out and can't read half enough. ... The more one reads the more one sees we have to read."
(John Adams, Letter to Abigail Adams 28 December 1794).
(John Adams, Letter to Abigail Adams 28 December 1794).
President's Day Good Words #1
"Every post is honorable in which a man can serve his country"
(George Washington, letter to Benedict Arnold, 14 September 1775)
(George Washington, letter to Benedict Arnold, 14 September 1775)
Sunday, February 16, 2014
Protecting Numbskulls
The doorknobs in Georgia now want to make it legal to try to bring guns aboard airplanes. That's not how they phrase it, but that's the effect:
Of course, having a loose gun is dangerous in so many ways: it can simply go off if bumped or dropped (like the loaded shotgun some nitwit had in their baggage, or the pistols that fall out of suitcases, pockets, purses and waistbands and sometimes shooting their owners, spouses and innocent bystanders). A kid could find it while searching daddy's pocket for loose change. The attendant at the coat check at a restaurant could find it and give it to her drug-addict boyfriend.
Finally, this gives terrorists a free pass to find the best way to sneak guns onto planes.They can keep probing security without fear of arrest until they eventually learn to sneak a weapon in. I'm sure these gun nuts will write the law so that security can't track how often and who attempts to smuggle guns aboard airplanes, the same way they make the FBI discard background check data. You wouldn't want those forgetful nitwits to get a black mark against them for trying to bring a gun aboard a plane 20 times, or track terrorists amassing a major arsenal.
Oh, and the "license to carry" proviso is meaningless, since places like Georgia basically require that anyone who wants such a license will get it.
The main reason airport security works is that the bad guys don't know exactly what the TSA is looking for. If allowed to experiment without repercussions, terrorists will eventually learn the best way to sneak weapons aboard airplanes.
Meanwhile, the rest of us are still wasting our time taking our shoes off and screwing around putting shampoo and toothpaste into stupid little plastic bags.
As with stand-your-ground laws, guys with guns want a free pass to screw up and not suffer the consequences for their mistakes. The problem is that when armed idiots make mistakes people wind up dead.
Gun nuts in Georgia are still actively campaigning to bring their weapons into churches and college campuses. Why not airports and airplanes? I mean, the logic is exactly the same: the more guns we have on airplanes, the safer we'll be. Right?
Do we really want laws that promote incompetent and careless weapons practices, allowing these folks to be even more oblivious about the guns bouncing around in their suitcases, pockets and waistbands?
Now gun-friendly lawmakers in Georgia want people licensed to carry a gun to avoid arrest if they accidentally bring their firearms into the security checkpoint at the country’s busiest airport and willingly leave the security line. It comes as gun rights groups in Georgia push state lawmakers to broaden the places where people can legally take guns, including churches and other houses of worship.Why do they need this law? They don't want forgetful and incompetent gun owners to be arrested for trying to board a plane with a loose gun in their pocket or briefcase. They can't be bothered to think ahead or plan.
Of course, having a loose gun is dangerous in so many ways: it can simply go off if bumped or dropped (like the loaded shotgun some nitwit had in their baggage, or the pistols that fall out of suitcases, pockets, purses and waistbands and sometimes shooting their owners, spouses and innocent bystanders). A kid could find it while searching daddy's pocket for loose change. The attendant at the coat check at a restaurant could find it and give it to her drug-addict boyfriend.
Finally, this gives terrorists a free pass to find the best way to sneak guns onto planes.They can keep probing security without fear of arrest until they eventually learn to sneak a weapon in. I'm sure these gun nuts will write the law so that security can't track how often and who attempts to smuggle guns aboard airplanes, the same way they make the FBI discard background check data. You wouldn't want those forgetful nitwits to get a black mark against them for trying to bring a gun aboard a plane 20 times, or track terrorists amassing a major arsenal.
Oh, and the "license to carry" proviso is meaningless, since places like Georgia basically require that anyone who wants such a license will get it.
The main reason airport security works is that the bad guys don't know exactly what the TSA is looking for. If allowed to experiment without repercussions, terrorists will eventually learn the best way to sneak weapons aboard airplanes.
Meanwhile, the rest of us are still wasting our time taking our shoes off and screwing around putting shampoo and toothpaste into stupid little plastic bags.
As with stand-your-ground laws, guys with guns want a free pass to screw up and not suffer the consequences for their mistakes. The problem is that when armed idiots make mistakes people wind up dead.
Gun nuts in Georgia are still actively campaigning to bring their weapons into churches and college campuses. Why not airports and airplanes? I mean, the logic is exactly the same: the more guns we have on airplanes, the safer we'll be. Right?
Do we really want laws that promote incompetent and careless weapons practices, allowing these folks to be even more oblivious about the guns bouncing around in their suitcases, pockets and waistbands?
Climate Change Lies
With John Kerry's pointed remarks on climate change yesterday, it's important to note the various arguments that the Church of the Climate Denier uses all the time and illustrate how they are lying. Here is a complete list of their assertions by popularity which are all linked to the evidence that shows how they are completely false. Take note of how one can examine the data from a basic, intermediate or advanced point of view with many of the falsehoods.
So, the next time you encounter the adolescent climate skeptic who just can't stand the fact that liberals are correct about something, show the this list. Ask them to refute the evidence using the same scientific method used in each of the links. Remind that "No, you are!!" and a stomp down the hallway with a door slam are not logic based arguments.
So, the next time you encounter the adolescent climate skeptic who just can't stand the fact that liberals are correct about something, show the this list. Ask them to refute the evidence using the same scientific method used in each of the links. Remind that "No, you are!!" and a stomp down the hallway with a door slam are not logic based arguments.
Saturday, February 15, 2014
The Storming of the Bast--er--The Pick N Save
Dereck Simonsmeier loves his gun a lot and feels the need to carry it with him everywhere he goes. Of course, that means that he is attacked for his freedom loving at places like Pick N Save. Never mind the fact that it's private property and the owners of said firm can bounce his ass whenever they want. He needed to stand his ground! Why?
The cold had numbed my arms and severely restricted the movement of my hands and fingers. If I had needed to draw my weapon in the Pick ’N Save parking lot, I would have been unsuccessful.
That's right, kids! Villains lurk around every corner waiting to pounce and attack!!! Look out!!! There's Barack Obama and his commie pinkos comin' to gin us!! Perhaps Simonsmeier was the victim of just such a dastardly plot when he was arrested for threatening a man with a gun. What a shining example of a responsible gun owner.
And people wonder why I don't want armed civilians in our schools.
The cold had numbed my arms and severely restricted the movement of my hands and fingers. If I had needed to draw my weapon in the Pick ’N Save parking lot, I would have been unsuccessful.
That's right, kids! Villains lurk around every corner waiting to pounce and attack!!! Look out!!! There's Barack Obama and his commie pinkos comin' to gin us!! Perhaps Simonsmeier was the victim of just such a dastardly plot when he was arrested for threatening a man with a gun. What a shining example of a responsible gun owner.
And people wonder why I don't want armed civilians in our schools.
US Assets Outweigh US Debt
The next time you here someone blow a bowel over federal debt, show them this.
- More than 900,000 separate real assets covering more than 3 billion sq. ft.
- Mineral rights, on and offshore, covering 2.515 billion acres of land, more than the total surface land in Canada -45,190 underutilized buildings, the operating costs of which are $1.66 billion annually
- Oil and gas resources on and offshore worth $128 trillion, roughly eight times the national debt of the country
This doesn't even include all of our military resources. Add that in and all of the obsessive focus on our debt is seen clearly as being irrational and hysterical. Even the Heritage Foundation agrees.
So, given these very simple facts, it seems that some folks have been trying to pull the wool over our eyes (see: lying) simply because they have a pathological hatred of the federal government (see also, unresolved issues with parents, authority, massive insecurity) and can't admit when they are wrong.
So, given these very simple facts, it seems that some folks have been trying to pull the wool over our eyes (see: lying) simply because they have a pathological hatred of the federal government (see also, unresolved issues with parents, authority, massive insecurity) and can't admit when they are wrong.
Friday, February 14, 2014
Anecdata a la Markadelphia
If I used the same logic as a conservative, I would say that MN Sure is doing just fine. Every person I know who has signed up for it has had no problems whatsoever with the site or the registration process. Yet that is not the actual case in reality. There have been some improvements of late but the web site has encountered significant problems during its tenure. This would be a great example of why anecdata is complete bullshit.
Any time you hear "Everyone I know..." at the beginning of a sentence, don't listen.
Any time you hear "Everyone I know..." at the beginning of a sentence, don't listen.
Younger People Signing Up For Health Insurance
Looks like younger folks are starting to sign up for health insurance.
Even more promising, the percentage of young adults — the coveted demographic considered key to making the insurance pools viable — rose 3 percentage points during January. People ages 18-34 now account for 27 percent of the total exchange enrollment, up from 24 percent in December. "The 65 percent growth rate" of young adults signing up "is larger than all other age groups combined," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told reporters in a conference call.
Good news!
Even more promising, the percentage of young adults — the coveted demographic considered key to making the insurance pools viable — rose 3 percentage points during January. People ages 18-34 now account for 27 percent of the total exchange enrollment, up from 24 percent in December. "The 65 percent growth rate" of young adults signing up "is larger than all other age groups combined," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told reporters in a conference call.
Good news!
Thursday, February 13, 2014
A Health Club Instead of Health Insurance?
A friend wanted to talk about the new health care law. First he heaped damning praise on Obama for frankly admitting that the young are expected to help pay for the old. Then he joked about how the ACA mandates that policies cover maternity care, which was supposed to be funny because my wife is beyond her childbearing years.
He seemed unaware of the irony. Obviously, it's the only fair thing to do: if the young are expected to help pay for the problems of old age, then the old should help pay for the problems of youth, as well as the care and upbringing of the next generation.
Policies under Obamacare also cover contraception, prenatal care, vaccinations for various childhood diseases like mumps and measles, as well as HPV and influenza: many of those conditions affect only babies, children, and young women. Even if you have moral objections to contraception, you shouldn't stand in the way of other people taking responsibility to avoid accidental pregnancy. Childrearing is expensive.
Policies also cover the problems old age brings: degenerative orthopedic conditions, stroke, cancer and heart disease. But young people aren't immune to car accidents, sprained ankles, broken legs and tumors. My sister had brain surgery to correct an aneurysm in her twenties. A couple of years ago our friends' 24-year-old daughter came down with non-Hodgkins lymphoma -- at first they diagnosed it as mumps. She was cured and the family didn't lose everything they owned in the process, because she was still on her parents' policy, courtesy of Obamacare.
The whole point of health care policies is to spread risk among a large population. We all pay in to help everyone else out when they need it, and they in turn help us out when we need it. When the people who are young now get old, their kids will pay in to help them out.
Everyone will need some kind of health care in their lifetimes, much of it non-emergency. That's why insurance is really the wrong concept. Having a child shouldn't be something that you insure against; it's not like your house getting hit by a tornado. It's a normal and necessary aspect of life, something that everyone needs to happen, even if we ourselves are childless. We need all sorts of regular health care: flu vaccinations, dental exams, physical checkups, breast and cervical exams, and so on.
Instead of thinking in terms of a car insurance policy where we choose whether we get coverage for liability and not collision, we should be thinking of health care premiums like a membership at a health club: I might not use the tennis and racquetball courts, but I do use the gym and the weight machines. And if want to take tennis lessons the courts are there.
By trying to segment up society, pretending that we're all independent islands that should survive on our own, that we'll never face certain problems, we isolate ourselves and make the nation as a whole weaker. We also create smaller risk pools that are more likely to have financial difficulties.
The private health insurance model we have now is clearly flawed and inefficient. There are huge cost discrepancies in different areas of the country, and still not everyone is covered. Those are the problems we should be working on. Together, in good faith, to make it better, instead of using fear to score political points.
He seemed unaware of the irony. Obviously, it's the only fair thing to do: if the young are expected to help pay for the problems of old age, then the old should help pay for the problems of youth, as well as the care and upbringing of the next generation.
Policies under Obamacare also cover contraception, prenatal care, vaccinations for various childhood diseases like mumps and measles, as well as HPV and influenza: many of those conditions affect only babies, children, and young women. Even if you have moral objections to contraception, you shouldn't stand in the way of other people taking responsibility to avoid accidental pregnancy. Childrearing is expensive.
Policies also cover the problems old age brings: degenerative orthopedic conditions, stroke, cancer and heart disease. But young people aren't immune to car accidents, sprained ankles, broken legs and tumors. My sister had brain surgery to correct an aneurysm in her twenties. A couple of years ago our friends' 24-year-old daughter came down with non-Hodgkins lymphoma -- at first they diagnosed it as mumps. She was cured and the family didn't lose everything they owned in the process, because she was still on her parents' policy, courtesy of Obamacare.
The whole point of health care policies is to spread risk among a large population. We all pay in to help everyone else out when they need it, and they in turn help us out when we need it. When the people who are young now get old, their kids will pay in to help them out.
Everyone will need some kind of health care in their lifetimes, much of it non-emergency. That's why insurance is really the wrong concept. Having a child shouldn't be something that you insure against; it's not like your house getting hit by a tornado. It's a normal and necessary aspect of life, something that everyone needs to happen, even if we ourselves are childless. We need all sorts of regular health care: flu vaccinations, dental exams, physical checkups, breast and cervical exams, and so on.
Instead of thinking in terms of a car insurance policy where we choose whether we get coverage for liability and not collision, we should be thinking of health care premiums like a membership at a health club: I might not use the tennis and racquetball courts, but I do use the gym and the weight machines. And if want to take tennis lessons the courts are there.
By trying to segment up society, pretending that we're all independent islands that should survive on our own, that we'll never face certain problems, we isolate ourselves and make the nation as a whole weaker. We also create smaller risk pools that are more likely to have financial difficulties.
The private health insurance model we have now is clearly flawed and inefficient. There are huge cost discrepancies in different areas of the country, and still not everyone is covered. Those are the problems we should be working on. Together, in good faith, to make it better, instead of using fear to score political points.
The Rump Kamikaze Caucus (Good Words)
From the Wall Street Journal...
Not coincidentally, activist groups allied with Mr. Cruz announced they will use those votes in GOP primaries this year against Messrs. McConnell and Cornyn. Mr. Cruz claims to be neutral in Senate primaries, but he knew exactly what he was doing.
Democrats beat the odds and retained their Senate majority in 2010 and 2012 in part because they stuck together. If Republicans fail again this November, a big reason will be their rump kamikaze caucus.
Man, the Wall Street Journal really doesn't like the Tea Party and the right wing bloggers much, do they?
But they are right, of course. All this talk in February about the GOP taking back the Senate when we don't even know who the candidates are in some of these states is hilarious. I'm thinking we are going to see some Todd Akins again. They just can't help themselves...
Not coincidentally, activist groups allied with Mr. Cruz announced they will use those votes in GOP primaries this year against Messrs. McConnell and Cornyn. Mr. Cruz claims to be neutral in Senate primaries, but he knew exactly what he was doing.
Democrats beat the odds and retained their Senate majority in 2010 and 2012 in part because they stuck together. If Republicans fail again this November, a big reason will be their rump kamikaze caucus.
Man, the Wall Street Journal really doesn't like the Tea Party and the right wing bloggers much, do they?
But they are right, of course. All this talk in February about the GOP taking back the Senate when we don't even know who the candidates are in some of these states is hilarious. I'm thinking we are going to see some Todd Akins again. They just can't help themselves...
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Why The GOP Surrendered On The Debt Ceiling
Politico has a good piece up about why the GOP caved on the debt ceiling. The political reality is obvious. The Senate and the White House weren't going to budge and if the federal government defaulted, that would be the end of the Republicans chances in this year's election. It's interesting to watch Reince Priebus riding herd over the nutters in his party. It will be interesting to see if he can keep the moonbats locked up for the next 9 odd months.
For those out there who feel that our debt is steering us into collapse, I have one simple question: does the debt of the United States outweigh our assets?
For those out there who feel that our debt is steering us into collapse, I have one simple question: does the debt of the United States outweigh our assets?
Thomas Jefferson's Bible
Conservatives love to heap adulation on the founding fathers and bloviate about how they were all Christians founding a Christian nation...at least their version of Christianity. Certainly, Thomas Jefferson, our nation's 3rd president, is one of those heroes who is held up as a champion of the Right and a defender of more local government power.
I have to wonder, though, what those same conservatives think about the fact that Jefferson created his own version of the New Testament.
Thomas Jefferson, together with several of his fellow founding fathers, was influenced by the principles of deism, a construct that envisioned a supreme being as a sort of watchmaker who had created the world but no longer intervened directly in daily life. A product of the Age of Enlightenment, Jefferson was keenly interested in science and the perplexing theological questions it raised. Although the author of the Declaration of Independence was one of the great champions of religious freedom, his belief system was sufficiently out of the mainstream that opponents in the 1800 presidential election labeled him a “howling Atheist.”
In fact, Jefferson was devoted to the teachings of Jesus Christ. But he didn’t always agree with how they were interpreted by biblical sources, including the writers of the four Gospels, whom he considered to be untrustworthy correspondents. So Jefferson created his own gospel by taking a sharp instrument, perhaps a penknife, to existing copies of the New Testament and pasting up his own account of Christ’s philosophy, distinguishing it from what he called “the corruption of schismatizing followers.”
In some ways, Jefferson had a point but I wouldn't go as far to cut and past my own version of the Bible nor accuse Christ's followers as corrupt. They were simply trying to understand something that was way beyond them which we can understand in greater clarity today. That's why I'm hoping that in a decade or two, we can leave behind the anti-science of the Right and start a new Age of Enlightenment in which we truly do "His works and greater than these." We can't allow angry, hateful, insecure, irrational people filled with fear to bully their way into being the "official" spokesmodels for God. He is much bigger than their petty obsessions with gay sex and lady parts which, honestly, is an extension of their own sexual hangups.
I wonder what would happen if Barack Obama did what Jefferson did with the Bible...:)
I have to wonder, though, what those same conservatives think about the fact that Jefferson created his own version of the New Testament.
Thomas Jefferson, together with several of his fellow founding fathers, was influenced by the principles of deism, a construct that envisioned a supreme being as a sort of watchmaker who had created the world but no longer intervened directly in daily life. A product of the Age of Enlightenment, Jefferson was keenly interested in science and the perplexing theological questions it raised. Although the author of the Declaration of Independence was one of the great champions of religious freedom, his belief system was sufficiently out of the mainstream that opponents in the 1800 presidential election labeled him a “howling Atheist.”
In fact, Jefferson was devoted to the teachings of Jesus Christ. But he didn’t always agree with how they were interpreted by biblical sources, including the writers of the four Gospels, whom he considered to be untrustworthy correspondents. So Jefferson created his own gospel by taking a sharp instrument, perhaps a penknife, to existing copies of the New Testament and pasting up his own account of Christ’s philosophy, distinguishing it from what he called “the corruption of schismatizing followers.”
In some ways, Jefferson had a point but I wouldn't go as far to cut and past my own version of the Bible nor accuse Christ's followers as corrupt. They were simply trying to understand something that was way beyond them which we can understand in greater clarity today. That's why I'm hoping that in a decade or two, we can leave behind the anti-science of the Right and start a new Age of Enlightenment in which we truly do "His works and greater than these." We can't allow angry, hateful, insecure, irrational people filled with fear to bully their way into being the "official" spokesmodels for God. He is much bigger than their petty obsessions with gay sex and lady parts which, honestly, is an extension of their own sexual hangups.
I wonder what would happen if Barack Obama did what Jefferson did with the Bible...:)
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Debt Ceiling Raised
House passes clean debt ceiling bill
Yes, I believe they have learned the folly of their ways...especially in an election year.
Yes, I believe they have learned the folly of their ways...especially in an election year.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)