I'm Not Sure, But I Think the Seventh Day Adventists Just Called The Pope a Girl
The Seventh Day Adventists describe themselves as "a Christian Community preparing the world for the return of Jesus Christ." They do this not by setting out traffic cones and making sure there are enough Porta Potties around likely Second Coming sites, but by preaching what they believe is the one-and-only correct way to worship. That is, they're pretty much like every other religion in the world.
The Seventh Day Adventists' particular bugaboo is the sabbath, which they believe should be Saturday, not Sunday. They are absolutely convinced that other Christians are making a mortal mistake by worshipping on the wrong day, and point to Bible verses like Numbers 15:32-36 to show how serious God is about this sabbath business:
"And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall surely be put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
Friday, February 11, 2005
FunctionalAmbivalent:
According to MSNBC, female interrogators at Gitmo have been rubbing their Christian breasts against Moslem prisoners in order to make them talk. The prisoners, I mean, not the breasts. Although, to be honest, if a pair of talking breasts interrogated me, I'd tell them anything they wanted to know.
But seriously:
The prisoners have told their lawyers, who compiled the accounts, that female interrogators regularly violated Muslim taboos about sex and contact with women. The women rubbed their bodies against the men, wore skimpy clothes in front of them, made sexually explicit remarks and touched them provocatively...
But seriously:
The prisoners have told their lawyers, who compiled the accounts, that female interrogators regularly violated Muslim taboos about sex and contact with women. The women rubbed their bodies against the men, wore skimpy clothes in front of them, made sexually explicit remarks and touched them provocatively...
It's a dangerous world
by
Tony Blankley (archive)
February 9, 2005 | printer friendly version Print | email to a friend Send
President Bush's State of the Union Address last Wednesday included the most audacious presidential foreign policy utterances since President Kennedy's demand that the Soviet Union remove its atomic weapons from Cuba in 1963. The impact of President Bush's words may be at least as historically consequential as Kennedy's.
Tony Blankley (archive)
February 9, 2005 | printer friendly version Print | email to a friend Send
President Bush's State of the Union Address last Wednesday included the most audacious presidential foreign policy utterances since President Kennedy's demand that the Soviet Union remove its atomic weapons from Cuba in 1963. The impact of President Bush's words may be at least as historically consequential as Kennedy's.
A Conflict of Visions
A Conflict of Visions
Ideological Origins of Political Struggles
By Thomas Sowell
Review by Scott Bulmahn
"One of the curious things about political opinions is how often the same people line up on opposite sides of different issues. The issues themselves may have no intrinsic connection with each other… [Yet] the same familiar faces can be found glaring at each other from opposite sides of the political fence, again and again."
In A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles, Sowell uses a refreshing but systematic approach to explain this phenomenon in terms of differences in underlying assumptions about human nature: whether human nature is inherently imperfect and hasn't essentially changed throughout history (the "constrained vision"), or whether human nature can be improved through education, programs, and spending (the "unconstrained vision," or essentially the vision of the Age of Reason).
Ideological Origins of Political Struggles
By Thomas Sowell
Review by Scott Bulmahn
"One of the curious things about political opinions is how often the same people line up on opposite sides of different issues. The issues themselves may have no intrinsic connection with each other… [Yet] the same familiar faces can be found glaring at each other from opposite sides of the political fence, again and again."
In A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles, Sowell uses a refreshing but systematic approach to explain this phenomenon in terms of differences in underlying assumptions about human nature: whether human nature is inherently imperfect and hasn't essentially changed throughout history (the "constrained vision"), or whether human nature can be improved through education, programs, and spending (the "unconstrained vision," or essentially the vision of the Age of Reason).
The Enlightened Caveman:
The Pen (or keyboard, in this case) is Mightier Than The Gene
As the opening post to this blog, I thought I'd take a moment to describe the setting of this human drama. Here we are in the most prosperous time in the history of our species. The information age is upon us. We are instantly aware of events that transpire on the other side of the globe. We can travel inexpensively to most anywhere and stick a little plastic card in a machine that spits out money - in the right currency, at any time of day. Buildings that rise well beyond the clouds can be financed, designed, and constructed in years that can be counted on one hand. Here in America, food is abundant, cheap, and available at nearly any street corner (even if it isn't always good for us). The days of back-breaking labor are behind most all wage earners - especially the ones reading this. Yes, life today is light years beyond the dreams of our forefathers. Yet, many of the problems that have plagued mankind are still with us, in full force.
There is still far too much hate and intolerance in this world. There is still far too much insecurity and self-loathing in the minds of men (and women, lest my literary tendencies offend). There is still far too much jealousy and pettiness in human interaction. Group think is as strong as ever. The us against them mentality still reigns supreme in virtually all human endeavors. Ignorance and superstition are still paramount among the masses. How could this be? How could we have come so far as a species and yet the words of Plato and Shakespeare still ring as true today as they did when they first fell upon man's ears?
Should we not expect that our technological and societal advances would have rendered the words of the great bard and earlier philosophers anachronistic and altogether foreign? After all, they had no Internet. They had no ATMs or drive-thru windows or cell phones or Wal-Marts. In earlier centuries, death was an accepted part of everyday life. Here I am at the age of 33 and I have never lost anyone close to me. This is truly curious. How is it that the great thinkers of the past had such lasting insights into arc of human existence? Though we are adorned much more extravagantly these days, the only possible explanation is that something must be transcending our cultural advances. That something is our genes.
When we examine this curiosity against the backdrop of natural selection, we quickly realize that humanity has remained largely unchanged behaviorally because our genes have not changed to any significant degree for tens of thousands of years. We have the minds of cavemen, which brings me to the point of this blog.
If we are to take the next step as a species, if we are to render the words of Shakespeare historical rather than prescient, then we must understand what it is our genes are up to and take active steps to place the bad ones on the sidelines...for good. Of course, this is a figurative idea. I do not mean to suggest that we will go in and excise those genes that don't meet with our approval. The idea is that we must understand that our minds are built by our genes, and that our genes evolved in an environment that does not exist today. That environment promoted the aspects of our nature that have been captured so brilliantly by our philosophers and literary leaders, and many of those aspects are in dire need of an overhaul. But this is not a bad news story.
We have a long history of taming our genes. Birth control, monogamy, the rule of law, capitalism, and gene therapy are all examples of mankind overruling genetic influences in favor the conscious desires of human beings. We can, and must, do the same thing with respect to many of our caveman proclivities. This blog is dedicated to exploring this concept. I have written a book on the subject (see the link to "in print" above for more info on it), but it occurs to me that current events offer excellent opportunities to point out where our ancient minds are doing us harm, and more importantly, to point out what it takes to fix things. If we are successful in transitioning to the next era of Homo sapiens, we will not recognize the human characters in the writings of Shakespeare and Plato centuries from now. Let's get on with it...
As the opening post to this blog, I thought I'd take a moment to describe the setting of this human drama. Here we are in the most prosperous time in the history of our species. The information age is upon us. We are instantly aware of events that transpire on the other side of the globe. We can travel inexpensively to most anywhere and stick a little plastic card in a machine that spits out money - in the right currency, at any time of day. Buildings that rise well beyond the clouds can be financed, designed, and constructed in years that can be counted on one hand. Here in America, food is abundant, cheap, and available at nearly any street corner (even if it isn't always good for us). The days of back-breaking labor are behind most all wage earners - especially the ones reading this. Yes, life today is light years beyond the dreams of our forefathers. Yet, many of the problems that have plagued mankind are still with us, in full force.
There is still far too much hate and intolerance in this world. There is still far too much insecurity and self-loathing in the minds of men (and women, lest my literary tendencies offend). There is still far too much jealousy and pettiness in human interaction. Group think is as strong as ever. The us against them mentality still reigns supreme in virtually all human endeavors. Ignorance and superstition are still paramount among the masses. How could this be? How could we have come so far as a species and yet the words of Plato and Shakespeare still ring as true today as they did when they first fell upon man's ears?
Should we not expect that our technological and societal advances would have rendered the words of the great bard and earlier philosophers anachronistic and altogether foreign? After all, they had no Internet. They had no ATMs or drive-thru windows or cell phones or Wal-Marts. In earlier centuries, death was an accepted part of everyday life. Here I am at the age of 33 and I have never lost anyone close to me. This is truly curious. How is it that the great thinkers of the past had such lasting insights into arc of human existence? Though we are adorned much more extravagantly these days, the only possible explanation is that something must be transcending our cultural advances. That something is our genes.
When we examine this curiosity against the backdrop of natural selection, we quickly realize that humanity has remained largely unchanged behaviorally because our genes have not changed to any significant degree for tens of thousands of years. We have the minds of cavemen, which brings me to the point of this blog.
If we are to take the next step as a species, if we are to render the words of Shakespeare historical rather than prescient, then we must understand what it is our genes are up to and take active steps to place the bad ones on the sidelines...for good. Of course, this is a figurative idea. I do not mean to suggest that we will go in and excise those genes that don't meet with our approval. The idea is that we must understand that our minds are built by our genes, and that our genes evolved in an environment that does not exist today. That environment promoted the aspects of our nature that have been captured so brilliantly by our philosophers and literary leaders, and many of those aspects are in dire need of an overhaul. But this is not a bad news story.
We have a long history of taming our genes. Birth control, monogamy, the rule of law, capitalism, and gene therapy are all examples of mankind overruling genetic influences in favor the conscious desires of human beings. We can, and must, do the same thing with respect to many of our caveman proclivities. This blog is dedicated to exploring this concept. I have written a book on the subject (see the link to "in print" above for more info on it), but it occurs to me that current events offer excellent opportunities to point out where our ancient minds are doing us harm, and more importantly, to point out what it takes to fix things. If we are successful in transitioning to the next era of Homo sapiens, we will not recognize the human characters in the writings of Shakespeare and Plato centuries from now. Let's get on with it...
North Korea is getting feistier:
"We justly urged the U.S. to renounce its hostile policy toward the DPRK whose aim was to seek the latter's 'regime change' and switch its policy to that of peaceful coexistence between the two countries."
"They have declared it as their final goal to terminate the tyranny, defined the DPRK, too, as an 'outpost of tyranny' and blustered that they would not rule out the use of force when necessary."
"The U.S. has declared a new ideological standoff aimed at a 'regime change' in the DPRK while talking much about 'peaceful and diplomatic solution' to the nuclear issue and the 'resumption of the six-party talks' in a bid to mislead the world public opinion.
And why not? The DPRK already has nukes. Maybe there's a lesson there.
"They have declared it as their final goal to terminate the tyranny, defined the DPRK, too, as an 'outpost of tyranny' and blustered that they would not rule out the use of force when necessary."
"The U.S. has declared a new ideological standoff aimed at a 'regime change' in the DPRK while talking much about 'peaceful and diplomatic solution' to the nuclear issue and the 'resumption of the six-party talks' in a bid to mislead the world public opinion.
And why not? The DPRK already has nukes. Maybe there's a lesson there.
CODDLE ME NOT
CODDLE ME NOT
The seven year old is off to sleep over at her friend's house tonight. I'm a bit wary of sleep-overs because a year or two ago her hostess' parent completely fell for the seven year old's pathetic "I'm scared! [whimper]" act and ended up trying every soothing trick they could think of: OK! you can fall asleep in our bed ... still awake and whimpering? OK! we'll go to sleep on the floor in your room ... still whimpering? OK! you can watch the movie we're watching ... and so on. Very little sleep was had by anyone and I felt terribly guilty. So this time I warned the mom: don't coddle her! Be very matter of fact if she whines and don't reward any silly complaints with gooey sympathy.
The seven year old is an exceedingly bashful and anxious soul so I long ago learned to match my sympathetic responses to the reasonableness of the complaint: bit tongues get hugs and coos (but not for terribly long), complaints that she "didn't have fun today" get a perfunctory ("well, I'm sorry you feel that way"). If we cuddle and make much of her when she's "scared," she seems to feel it more intensely, not less.
You get more of what you reward -- this seems like a truism to me. But not to the (now fading, I hope) self-esteem gurus who recently endured another nail in their beloved theorem:
In fact, according to a study by Donald Forsyth at Virginia Commonwealth University, college students with mediocre grades who got regular self-esteem strokes from their professors ended up doing worse on final exams than students who were told to suck it up and try harder.
(Via Functional Ambivalent)
If the students got strokes for mediocrity what's the big surprise that they didn't try hard to preven it from happening in the future?
The seven year old is off to sleep over at her friend's house tonight. I'm a bit wary of sleep-overs because a year or two ago her hostess' parent completely fell for the seven year old's pathetic "I'm scared! [whimper]" act and ended up trying every soothing trick they could think of: OK! you can fall asleep in our bed ... still awake and whimpering? OK! we'll go to sleep on the floor in your room ... still whimpering? OK! you can watch the movie we're watching ... and so on. Very little sleep was had by anyone and I felt terribly guilty. So this time I warned the mom: don't coddle her! Be very matter of fact if she whines and don't reward any silly complaints with gooey sympathy.
The seven year old is an exceedingly bashful and anxious soul so I long ago learned to match my sympathetic responses to the reasonableness of the complaint: bit tongues get hugs and coos (but not for terribly long), complaints that she "didn't have fun today" get a perfunctory ("well, I'm sorry you feel that way"). If we cuddle and make much of her when she's "scared," she seems to feel it more intensely, not less.
You get more of what you reward -- this seems like a truism to me. But not to the (now fading, I hope) self-esteem gurus who recently endured another nail in their beloved theorem:
In fact, according to a study by Donald Forsyth at Virginia Commonwealth University, college students with mediocre grades who got regular self-esteem strokes from their professors ended up doing worse on final exams than students who were told to suck it up and try harder.
(Via Functional Ambivalent)
If the students got strokes for mediocrity what's the big surprise that they didn't try hard to preven it from happening in the future?
To Vietnam Veterans
To Vietnam Veterans
In the post here, I expressed my gratitude to America. Now, I would like to say a few words of thanks to a particular group of Americans: Vietnam veterans. Of course, all those who have ever served in uniform deserve our respect and gratitude, but I have a soft spot in my heart for Vietnam vets, for obvious reasons.
In the post here, I expressed my gratitude to America. Now, I would like to say a few words of thanks to a particular group of Americans: Vietnam veterans. Of course, all those who have ever served in uniform deserve our respect and gratitude, but I have a soft spot in my heart for Vietnam vets, for obvious reasons.
Hurry Up and Wait
Hurry Up and Wait
I have to pretend that it won't, but I now know my securities fraud case will settle. The judge reamed out the plaintiff at the settlement conference, and strong-armed him into making an offer. It was a good offer, much less than costs of defense. Our client has countered, making sure it isn't paying more than it has to, but we've been told that if push comes to shove, it will take the offer.
It will probably take until sometime next week to iron everything out. In the meantime, trial is just over two weeks away. We have to "keep the pressure on" by continuing to get ready for trial, file some motions in limine, get our jury instructions and verdict forms out, subpoena witnesses, be a nuisance. In other words, I'm doing a ton of semi-mindless "busy work."
So, I'm going to get back to work and bill as many hours as I can before I'm told to stop working. But when you know it isn't going to matter, it's hard to put much effort into it. I'll just mark everything I do "draft" and plug away.
I have to pretend that it won't, but I now know my securities fraud case will settle. The judge reamed out the plaintiff at the settlement conference, and strong-armed him into making an offer. It was a good offer, much less than costs of defense. Our client has countered, making sure it isn't paying more than it has to, but we've been told that if push comes to shove, it will take the offer.
It will probably take until sometime next week to iron everything out. In the meantime, trial is just over two weeks away. We have to "keep the pressure on" by continuing to get ready for trial, file some motions in limine, get our jury instructions and verdict forms out, subpoena witnesses, be a nuisance. In other words, I'm doing a ton of semi-mindless "busy work."
So, I'm going to get back to work and bill as many hours as I can before I'm told to stop working. But when you know it isn't going to matter, it's hard to put much effort into it. I'll just mark everything I do "draft" and plug away.
Egg Shell Skull
Egg Shell Skull
This is a shout-out to any readers who have taken a first-year law school torts class. Behold, the "Egg Shell Skull" scenario, as most recently exemplified in today's story of a woman who was waiting for a metro bus in Wheaton and cursing loudly into her cell phone. The woman was asked to abstain from her disorderly conduct, but instead she resisted the metro police authorities (who wouldn't???) and was forced onto the ground and then was handcuffed (can't we all just get along???). Little did metro authorities know that this woman was 5 months pregnant (the bitch set me up!!!).
This makes me all nostalgic for the glory days of sitting in one of the G-Dubya law school lecture halls for my first semester torts class. It is there where I learned of the idea of the "Egg Shell Skull." If you assault or batter someone, and that person happens to be pregnant, or a heart attack waiting to happen, or a stroke waiting to happen, or an asthmatic, or a diabetic, or a hemophiliac, or an osteoporosisatic, or a geriatric, or a sissy-atic, or a wimp-atic, or anyone with any type of condition that you were not aware of, or a person who is more susceptible to any type of injury by virtue of some hidden illness or pre-existing infirmity, then basically, you're fucked. You can be held responsible for all of the injuries that may occur, even ones you didn't know about, AND even IF the bitch set you up.
Class dismissed.
This is a shout-out to any readers who have taken a first-year law school torts class. Behold, the "Egg Shell Skull" scenario, as most recently exemplified in today's story of a woman who was waiting for a metro bus in Wheaton and cursing loudly into her cell phone. The woman was asked to abstain from her disorderly conduct, but instead she resisted the metro police authorities (who wouldn't???) and was forced onto the ground and then was handcuffed (can't we all just get along???). Little did metro authorities know that this woman was 5 months pregnant (the bitch set me up!!!).
This makes me all nostalgic for the glory days of sitting in one of the G-Dubya law school lecture halls for my first semester torts class. It is there where I learned of the idea of the "Egg Shell Skull." If you assault or batter someone, and that person happens to be pregnant, or a heart attack waiting to happen, or a stroke waiting to happen, or an asthmatic, or a diabetic, or a hemophiliac, or an osteoporosisatic, or a geriatric, or a sissy-atic, or a wimp-atic, or anyone with any type of condition that you were not aware of, or a person who is more susceptible to any type of injury by virtue of some hidden illness or pre-existing infirmity, then basically, you're fucked. You can be held responsible for all of the injuries that may occur, even ones you didn't know about, AND even IF the bitch set you up.
Class dismissed.
America's Oldest Journal Covering the Newspaper Industry
Real White House Reporters Weigh In
Have any other attendees at White House briefings and presidential press conferences used fake names? No one E&P talked to in the D.C. press corps could think of anyone other than the now-famous "Jeff Gannon." They expressed concern about letting in people without proper credentials -- but also worry that this could go too far. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, meanwhile, asked Press Secretary Scott McClellan for all paperwork on "Gannon."
Have any other attendees at White House briefings and presidential press conferences used fake names? No one E&P talked to in the D.C. press corps could think of anyone other than the now-famous "Jeff Gannon." They expressed concern about letting in people without proper credentials -- but also worry that this could go too far. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, meanwhile, asked Press Secretary Scott McClellan for all paperwork on "Gannon."
Rafsanjani recommends US approach Iran through peaceful means
Rafsanjani recommends US approach Iran through peaceful means
Tehran, Feb 11, IRNA -- Chairman of the Expediency Council (EC) Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani here on Friday recommended that White House officials seek peaceful approaches toward the Islamic Republic. Rafsanjani, in a sermon at Tehran weekly Friday prayers, said the policy of coercion toward Iran will never work, and warned US leaders against the consequences of any effort against Iran. "I explicitly tell the White House that ... these threats will bear no fruit. They will not frighten us nor our people. Neither can you implement these threats," he said. "And if one day you ever think about implementing these ...
Tehran, Feb 11, IRNA -- Chairman of the Expediency Council (EC) Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani here on Friday recommended that White House officials seek peaceful approaches toward the Islamic Republic. Rafsanjani, in a sermon at Tehran weekly Friday prayers, said the policy of coercion toward Iran will never work, and warned US leaders against the consequences of any effort against Iran. "I explicitly tell the White House that ... these threats will bear no fruit. They will not frighten us nor our people. Neither can you implement these threats," he said. "And if one day you ever think about implementing these ...
How to play Ananova's video reports
How to play Ananova's video reports
You can watch Ananova videos on a PC with Windows Media Player or RealPlayer version 8 (or higher). Both are free to download.
PC users click here
You can watch Ananova videos on a PC with Windows Media Player or RealPlayer version 8 (or higher). Both are free to download.
PC users click here
I've gone satellite
I'll never go back to regular radio. It's great. However, I have a funny XM moment. I was on travel in a hotel, and had on Audio Visions, which is kind of an ambient channel. At about 4 am, I woke up - gurgling water! The bathroom was overflowing! No, just the selection on the radio. Whew. But then the sound of a bubbling brook in the early morning worked its biological magic, and I had to get up.
Daily Buzz : All The News That's Fit To Twist
2/10/2005
Senate Democrats declare " We are not a bunch of pussies"
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats demanded Thursday that President Bush order a halt to personal attacks on the party's leader, Sen. Harry Reid. "This is a new Democratic Party," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at a news conference called to release a letter telling Bush to muzzle his "political operatives."
"It says to the president, `We are not a bunch of pussies'," said Schumer, who likened the attacks on Reid to political knee-cappings.
The letter itself was written in milder terms. "We urge you to keep your word about being a uniter and publicly halt these counterproductive attacks so that we are able to work together in a bipartisan manner and debate issues on the merits," it says.
A White House spokesman has confirmed that President Bush has read the letter and will publicly respond once VP Cheney and Mr. Rowe agree on what he should say.
Buzz Master
Senate Democrats declare " We are not a bunch of pussies"
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats demanded Thursday that President Bush order a halt to personal attacks on the party's leader, Sen. Harry Reid. "This is a new Democratic Party," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at a news conference called to release a letter telling Bush to muzzle his "political operatives."
"It says to the president, `We are not a bunch of pussies'," said Schumer, who likened the attacks on Reid to political knee-cappings.
The letter itself was written in milder terms. "We urge you to keep your word about being a uniter and publicly halt these counterproductive attacks so that we are able to work together in a bipartisan manner and debate issues on the merits," it says.
A White House spokesman has confirmed that President Bush has read the letter and will publicly respond once VP Cheney and Mr. Rowe agree on what he should say.
Buzz Master
America's mistakes in Iraq.
America's mistakes in Iraq.
Apologies for not posting for a while. I'm having some personal issues that I need to deal with and I wasn't planning to blog today but as I was looking into my blogroll I saw a nice and interesting post at Michael Totten's that changed my mind.
I thought I should comment on part of the post, the part I think I know more about than Michael and most of the Americans that were in that company.
Michael thinks that the quarrel he and Hitchens had with Ghassan Al Atiyyah was unavoidable and he took Ahmed Al Rikabi's comment to be true, all because of how confusing the relation with America might seem to many Iraqis.
Apologies for not posting for a while. I'm having some personal issues that I need to deal with and I wasn't planning to blog today but as I was looking into my blogroll I saw a nice and interesting post at Michael Totten's that changed my mind.
I thought I should comment on part of the post, the part I think I know more about than Michael and most of the Americans that were in that company.
Michael thinks that the quarrel he and Hitchens had with Ghassan Al Atiyyah was unavoidable and he took Ahmed Al Rikabi's comment to be true, all because of how confusing the relation with America might seem to many Iraqis.
Catholicism is autocratic by nature
Catholicism is autocratic by nature, and therefore doomed. Put one man in charge, and he will inevitably mistake the weight of his ego for the will of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
