BIBLE...SCIENCE...BIBLE SCIENCE...ERROR ERROR, DOES NOT COMPUTE

I came across some articles on The Christian Post website.

One about a new exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City.






It is about human evolution.

As visitors enter the AMNH exhibit in New York, they will find three skeletons – a chimpanzee, a Neanderthal and a modern human. At another display, one can learn about genomics concepts which illustrate how close our DNA is to that of other primates such as bonobos and chimpanzees. Through this, the scientists emphasize how humans originated from apes.

Sounds alright. Though it needs to be said that we didn't evolve from apes. Now quit the conniption you fundamentalists. The trouble is saying that is a simple way to make a point of how far life has changed over the millions of years. But their were not a bunch of apes that became us, nor chimps, etc. All us five fingered banana lovers come from a common ancestor. Not that you didn't know that.

To me the thing worth noting came after reading the next article. On the Kenyan fossil fuss previously discussed on this blog.

In both they point to a soon to be opened new service to humanity.

Answers in Genesis, the world’s largest Christian apologetics ministry, is set to open its $27-million new museum designed to defend creation by examining fossils, animals, stars and natural science on Memorial Day weekend.

“The Bible, where it touches on science or any subject including same-sex marriage, race or abortion, is totally trustworthy,” said Ken Ham, co-founder and president of Answers in Genesis, in a statement. “As a revelation of history from the beginning to the end of time, the Bible is the foundation that enables us to construct the big picture and have the right approach in geology, biology, physics and astronomy.”

...

all with the focus to prove that the Bible can withstand scientific scrutiny.

“Today, science is pointing more powerfully to a creator than any other time,” said award-winning Christian author Lee Strobel, in his documentary “The Case for a Creator.” “The most logical and rational step is to put my faith in the Creator that science tells me exists.”

It is hard to read through that without a few spit takes.

The bible sets up science. It shows us the rational way? The bible is trustworthy in science? It is freaking trustworthy in history?

And here is the problem here. These people have preset answers and solutions. They just want to do and redo the science until it agrees with the TRUTH. And if that fails, the science is at fault, the numbers are wrong. If people suggests the assumptions don't hold up. They are fools, unbelievers, in denial of the TRUTH.

How do you argue with this? How do you debate?

If all they want to do is thumb through the bible/torah/koran, what is the point?

You'll have noticed the name Ken Hamm in the quotes above. He is an old champion of the creationist. An old school campaigner.

Reading these silly arguments they lay out, you might say to yourself, "This is silly. I could refute this five ways to Sunday." Sure. Many of us can. And we have, to the face of Ken Hamm and the rest at that. The trouble is they dismiss, wave hands, and the next day act as if you never met them. It is almost as if it is all just a schtick. That they are in it for the money. But a lot of these people are true believers. Something that helps them move on oblivious to the counter arguments. Oblivious to reason. That is the beauty of faith.

Unsurprises from the Administration

From Talking Points Memo has a few classic moments of Bush administration leadership and guidance this year.



In the realm of oversight, the administration:

Even when Congress was in Republican hands, Justice Department officials advised other government departments on how to stonewall congressional review. These efforts now appear to be ramping up.

...

The Justice Department Legal Counsel's office recently held meetings with lawyers of other departments to discuss strategy for responding to congressional requests for documents and hearing appearances.

...

they were tipped off to this by someone in the Justice Department worried about this new program.

Don't look for Open Government here. Even if you want to know how many paperclips the Department of Energy orders, you'll probably get stonewalled.

Not that this bothered the Republican Congress. They seemed quite happy to make speeches and NOT govern.

It would be nice if the MSM took notice and made as much a stink as they do about rumors and innuendo.


On to the "Surge".

Fewer than 20% of the additional Iraqi and American troops have arrived so far. And the roughly 5,000 that have arrived have yet to make a visible impact in this sprawling city of 6 million people, where thousands of paramilitary gunmen patrol the streets.

U.S. officials are trying to manage expectations both domestically and in Iraq, continually asserting that the new forces will slowly take up positions in the capital over the coming months.

...

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has said he is investigating whether he can speed the pace of the troop buildup. But a senior Pentagon official said this week that it was unlikely that U.S. troops could be sent to Baghdad any faster than planned. The five brigades going to the capital are due to arrive one per month, with the last coming in May.

You know what we are talking about here, right?

A bottleneck. In any system, a place that limits, usually very severely, change (moving/production/etc). This is a bottleneck. Can we move in a large force to the area fast? No.

What does this say about are ability to take and use forces through the region, or through the world? Nothing good.

What a wonderful job this administration has done. And do we have any reason to think they are going to be changing?

No.



And then their is AMERICAblog's look at the related topic of Iran.

Just yesterday, we learned from the Pentagon's Inspector General that the intelligence from the Defense Department linking Iraq to Al Qaeda was "dubious." But, the fake intel worked to get us in to one war, so Team Bush is using it again. For months, the Bush Administration is ratcheting up the rhetoric on Iran. They're getting ready to accuse Iran of cooperating with Al Qaeda -- but it might not be true this time either according to a report in today's Washington Post...

The Post:

Last week, the CIA sent an urgent report to President Bush's National Security Council: Iranian authorities had arrested two al-Qaeda operatives traveling through Iran on their way from Pakistan to Iraq. The suspects were caught along a well-worn, if little-noticed, route for militants determined to fight U.S. troops on Iraqi soil, according to a senior intelligence official. The arrests were presented to Bush's senior policy advisers as evidence that Iran appears committed to stopping al-Qaeda foot traffic across its borders, the intelligence official said. That assessment comes at a time when the Bush administration, in an effort to push for further U.N. sanctions on the Islamic republic, is preparing to publicly accuse Tehran of cooperating with and harboring al-Qaeda suspects.

So the trouble here is that the administration is trotting out the same lines that were once shone to be lies. Going to intel sources not all that different to the ones that gave us the patently false information on Iraq.


So if things are really so iffy, why get excited about al-Qaeda. Especially with so little interest yesterday. What's different today? The urge to handle Iran.

And that becomes the most terrifying thing about al-Qaeda. It acts as a motivator for us to do the worst of things. It gives this administration a place to grab hold a pull us all to some very dark places.



As a whole, not the most comforting series of events to contemplate.

Looking into the Edwards' health care plan.

At Truthout.org, they have some analysis of John Edwards' plan for US health care by Paul Krugman.




Among the twists in his plan:

People who don't get insurance from their employers wouldn't have to deal individually with insurance companies: they'd purchase insurance through "Health Markets": government-run bodies negotiating with insurance companies on the public's behalf. People would, in effect, be buying insurance from the government, with only the business of paying medical bills - not the function of granting insurance in the first place - outsourced to private insurers.

Take a look.

Best friend to Israel?

TomPaine.com has an article discussing the impacts of the relationship George Bush has cultivated with Israel. Is it one that is helping Israel die?

It is interesting to see the Bush Perspective:

Powell demurred, warning that this would unleash Sharon and “the consequences could be dire, especially for the Palestinians.” But according to O’Neill, Bush just shrugged, saying, “Sometimes a show of strength by one side can really clarify things.”

...

A similar account reflecting Bush’s compassion deficit disorder leaps from the pages of Ron Susskind’s The One Percent Doctrine. Crown Prince Abdullah, Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader was in high dudgeon in April 2002 when he arrived in Crawford to take issue with Bush’s decision to tilt toward Israel and scrap the American role of honest broker in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. With Bush’s freshly bestowed “man-of-peace” epithet for Sharon still ringing in his ear, Abdullah began by insisting that the president and his aides watch a 15-minute video. It showed the mayhem on the West Bank, American-made tanks, bloodied and dead children, screaming mothers. Then, still wordless, they all filed into another room where the Saudis proceeded to make specific demands, but Bush appeared distracted and was non-responsive. After a few minutes, the president turned to Abdullah and said, “Let’s go for a drive. Just you and me. I’ll show you the ranch.”

Bush was so obviously unprepared to discuss substance with his Saudi guests that some of the president’s aides checked into what had happened. The briefing packet for the president had been diverted to Cheney’s office. Bush never got it, so he was totally unaware of what the Saudis hoped to accomplish in making the trip to Crawford.

...

Not that Bush was starved for background briefings. Indeed, he showed a preference to get them from Prime Minister Sharon who, with his senior military aide, Gen. Yoav Galant, briefed the president both in Crawford (in 2005) and the Oval Office (in 2003) on Iran’s “nuclear weapons program.” Sorry if I find that odd. That used to be our job at the CIA. I’ll bet Sharon and Galant packed a bigger punch.

...

Have they learned nothing from the recent past? Far from enhancing Israel’s security, the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Washington’s encouragement of Israel’s feckless attack on Lebanon last summer resulted in more breeding ground for terrorist activity against Israel. This will seem child’s play compared to what would be in store, should the US and/or Israel bomb Iran.

Israel is telling the administration what to think about Iran's program, no wonder Gates was being so assured, but so vague.

The end results are we are being goaded into striking, inciting anger, and goading Israel to do the same, inciting anger.

This is yet another Bush relationship that has gone bad.

And we are doing Israel no favors by continuing it as it is now. We need counseling.

Johnson is getting active again.

Some good news in Washington.

While Sen. Tim Johnson is still in hospital, he is reading news clippings and starting to do some office work.

It has been 2 months since he suffered a brain hemorrhage.



Julianne Fischer, a spokeswoman:

We do not anticipate him back (in the Senate) for several weeks...We are bringing work to him rather than him coming to us. His first priority still is rehabilitation.

It is very good news indeed. I can only hope he will be out of the hospital, and able to be with his family, flly recovered.

Updates to the site.

I played a bit with the settings and template to improve viewing. Also to make me happy...Mostly to make me happy.



Hopefully everything is as easy to read and see as before, if not better.

And to continue the questioning of ridiculous questions...

John Edwards










Remember him?

Well, he has taken flack for not checking with Bill Donohue about who he can hire for his campaign.

He also made the mistake of having a social conscious, and deciding to pursue his concerns via the Democrats.


Oh, yeah.

And it gets worse. You see he's lawyer, and unlike many lawyers he didn't focus on getting money for himself and corporations. Oh no, he helped people who were wronged from time to time. The villain!

So he entered American politics and committed a the supreme cardinal sin of politics, he was wealthy. Doesn't it make you sick.

As AMERICAblog ponders, what is deal with the stories about Edward's house?

Apparently, again, Edwards has money.

Apparently, he has a family.

Apparently he wants to house them.

And, apparently, as he has disposable cash, he wants the house for his wife and kids to be extra nice.

Where is the controversy?

Is there some illegal cash? Cash from the campaign? Cash under the table? Anything illegal? Anything immoral?

NO.

So, why is the work he is having done on his house being used as a slur by pundits?

Is it because he has been critical of uneven wealth distribution? Because who has the money is amazingly lopsidedly in favor of the rich ("And the rich get richer.").

Maybe.

If so, that is the weakest asinine argument...well one of them, in this campaign season.

So, tell me, is there another reason (a reasonable reason) for home renovation being a slur.

The only comfort I can take is that the slur is catching on as well as Bush's "homicide bomber".

Lame. Just, lame.

As Seen on TV

Well, I came across an ad on another blog and thought it was worth being sure it got wider notice.

Frontline has a new show this next week (February 13th), entitled News War.

Should reporters have the right to protect anonymous sources?

Where is the line between legitimate national security concerns and the public's right to know?

What will be the future business model for the news industry? How will we get news?

This week, on FRONTLINE.

Check out the online discussion, video, and trailer.


It's on PBS, which is under attack from the administration, so get it while it is still around.

On sooner, this weekend, the great journalist Christiane Amanpour, did I mention she was a great Journalist, has a new Special Investigations Unit on. It is entitled The Journalist and the Jihadi - The Murder of Daniel Pearl. She is narrating it. It's on Saturday and Sunday, 7PM Central Time.

Christiane Amanpour, one of the few reasons to watch CNN.

And it continues

These baseless attacks continue on.

Now let's look at Obama.

On Daily Kos, their is a look at the story the sad, sad little man, Tucker Carlson covered on his show. You see Obama's church is...too BLACK!

[Now on the matter Obama and blackness, I will have more to say, in regard to baseless attacks tomorr...later.]





Carlson's punchline:

And when you espouse a theology that is racially exclusive, as this appears to be, it's hard to call that Christianity. I think it's pretty easy to call it wrong.

Now, do you smell it? That sweet, sweet scent of reality in the air? Oh, it stinks poor Tucker. From Media Matters.

In fact, Trinity encourages parishioners to be "soldiers for Black freedom and the dignity of all humankind [emphasis added]." The Tribune said that the church's "value system" was adopted in 1981 to hold "black Christians accountable for taking care of their own and for continuing to fight oppression." Further, the Tribune reported that according to Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University, "the 'disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness' is simply an argument against materialism and the pursuit of the American standard of wealth. Many white Christian churches also preach against materialism."

Easy enough to find out, but then where would the negative story be?

And that is the trouble. The PARTY should be standing against this garbage. Not wallowing it.

More to...later.

Democrat, not as democratty as it used to be.

I'm glad I was not the only one to see this and be struck off kilter by it. But Crooks and Liars caught it. And they have video as well.

On MSNBC today they had talk about the nastiness that is BLOGGINNNGGG!!! They brought in a Republican Strategist and Democrat Strategist. Oh boy, I bet they are going to fight!

Well the Dem, Dan Gerstein, starts out fast defending bloggers, especially the ones John Edwards hired...wait that isn't what happen...

Oh yeah! He attacked them. Wait, actually first he claimed he had his own 'lil blog that was just starting, so he could claim some knowledge, but also say he wasn't one of THEM. Then he decried these 2 women and almost all bloggers. Filthy things! They are opinionated, not always diplomatic, openly stating what they think, they even, sometimes, say things that others might find offensive, or even...naughty. Worse the fact it was a previous statement, before the campaign started is irrelevant to him. You can never say anything that someone somewhere can find fault with. Otherwise YOU ARE BANNED FROM POLITICS! Dan Gerstein has decreed it. Damn, with the comments in the Blasphemy Challenge, I guess I can kiss running from President good bye, or that cozy boot licking job during the '12 campaign. Darn me!

And, my oh my, did these ladies give him a fit.

...our D on this mini panel, folks.

So why? Is it just the uncouthness of these ladies? That they didn't just say the Catholic church was iffy, as opposed to what they actually felt. As he would no doubt explain, you have to just lie and smile through it, that's how he got to the ranks of Democratic strategist for the mid afternoon cable news story. Takes dedication, man!

No, the concern has to be that he, and others, especially the other candidates and wanna be's are silent. They leave Edwards to hand, and hope his hopes die.

Bad plan. As Atrios points out a moment from a recent film, where after aid comes to Queen Elizabeth, she points out he helped her simply because he saw the headlines, saw what was happening to her, and realized it could happen to him, too. It's that simple. The Republican Party. Bill Donohue. Right wing bloggers. Once they are done savaging, before even, they are going to belittle, contort stories, lie, and spit on all the rest. If they don't have the sense to stand now, together, against this crap. Then they get the pleasure of seeing the person in front of them fall, then watch the thugs pounce on them.

Daily Kos has more.

This fight, if Edwards is going to be called upon to make it, must be everyone's fight. If the other campaigns cannot demonstrate that they would have displayed the same courage we call upon Edwards to display, then they benefit from the right's strategy of divide and conquer. And to the extent that they benefit, they give a pass to and encourage such attacks in the future, and are powerless to stop them when the next one comes. All they can do is hold on tight, cross their fingers, and pray they're not the next target. And that's no way to win anything. Certainly not the White House.

Any chance this reality will sink in before it is too late. It is time to work to dismantle this crap factory.

Shifting the funding

On Crooks and Liars, they have talk about the administrations move to slash at Public Broadcasting - meaning PBS and NPR - budget.

At the same time Bush's budget proposes steep cuts to federal funds for public broadcasting by nearly 25%. According to the Association of Public Television Stations, the Bush budget would cut up to $145 million from the $460 million proposed FY 2008 budget for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting.
...
These tax dollars would flow to government mouthpieces including the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks, Alhurra, Radio Free Asia, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting.

So the money is going from the public interest source to the mouth piece. What ever the logic, it's not good for any of us.

Elie Wiesel, attacked in hotel.

The SFGate has the news about the recent attack on Elie Wiesel. Wiesel, Holocaust author and Nobel Peace Prize winner, was in San Fransisco attending a conference on "Facing Violence: Justice, Religion and Conflict Resolution". He was in an elevator at his hotel when a man entered and attempted to drag him from the elevator on the 6th floor and into a room. He fought the man and the assailant fled. Wiesel decided to leave the conference and the city.

From the article:

On Tuesday, a man identifying himself Eric Hunt and claiming to be the attacker posted an account of the incident on a virulently anti-Semitic and anti-Israel Web site.
...
"After ensuring no women would be traumatized by what I had to do (I had been trailing Wiesel for weeks), I stopped the elevator at the sixth floor," Hunt wrote. "I said I wanted to interview him. He protested, grabbed at his chest as if he was having a heart attack. He then screamed HELP! HELP! at the top of his lungs.

"I told him, 'Why, you don't want people to know the truth?' " Hunt wrote. "After pulling him about fifteen feet out of the elevator ... I decided that it was time for me to go."
...
Hunt said in his posting that he had intended to corner Wiesel and force him to admit that the Holocaust never happened.

"I had planned to bring Wiesel to my hotel room, where he would truthfully answer my questions regarding the fact that his non-fiction Holocaust memoir, 'Night,' is almost entirely fictitious," Hunt wrote on the site.

Just chilling. Chilling and disturbing.

After everything Wiesel has experienced:

Wiesel, a native of Romania, was sent by the Nazis in 1944 to Auschwitz, where his mother and three sisters were killed. His father died on a forced march to Buchenwald, another concentration camp, three months before the camp was liberated in 1945.

Wiesel has written more than 40 books based on his Holocaust experiences. In 1978, President Jimmy Carter named him to lead the effort to build the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. In 1986, Wiesel won the Nobel Peace Prize.

So it is a good reminder to remember that the dangers in this country aren't so easy to profile away. There is always a bigot waiting to jump out at a Holocaust survivor, and a nut job ready to jump out and accost an astronaut over the moon landings.

The Quotable Atheist

On AlterNet, they have excerpts from a new book, The Quotable Atheist (Full name: The Quotable Atheist: Ammunition for Nonbelievers, Political Junkies, Gadflies, and Those Generally Hell-Bound), by Jack Huberman.

It contains quotes from atheists, theists, and crazies, like Jerry Falwell. Well, when you need a good quote you want articulate refinement from Richard Dawkins, eloquent thoughtfulness from Fredrick Douglass, and even Phyllis Diller.

Here are some prime ones.

"I prayed for freedom for twenty years, but received no answer until I prayed with my legs."

- Frederick Douglass

"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded upon fables and mythologies."

- Thomas Jefferson

"Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions."

- Jerry Falwell

Homeopathy is bunk.

On Respectful Insolence, they have a story about a new study of homeopathy.

Guess what? The magic word is...BUNK!

The evidence from rigorous clinical trials of any type of therapeutic or preventive intervention testing homeopathy for childhood and adolescence ailments is not convincing enough for recommendations in any condition.

Why we are ticked

Why are people so openly contemptuous about the continue over coverage? Many people still don't understand why. They don't see how the bigger story makes it important to stand and be a critic.


From AMERICAblog, Yesterday 3 American soldiers died, no count on the Iraqi losses. In the passed 3 days, 14 deaths.

How much is this or anything of Iraq being covered? Think Progress has a break down, for your information.

One table:

Time Of Segments Devoted to Anna Nicole and Iraq on Broadcast Networks:
---ANNA NICOLE IRAQ
NBC-------3:13 0:14
CBS-------2:00 2:17
ABC-------2:21 2:58

That is a big discrepancy. For one death, compared to how many? Now if this was a major public figure, we'd be obliged to say otherwise. But an actor/model? Really?

Are we even memorializing her, or looking out for prurient detail? Did she choke on vomit, or slip and hit her head? Was she naked, or in negligee? Does it matter? So, please stop the suspect offense at the descent.

Sadly these many whose lives are consecrating the Iraqi ground are going unknown by most of us.

Take a moment to get to know Jennifer J. Harris, as she is memorialized on Boston.com.

A flute player, who worked hard to make into and through the naval academy. She went on to join the Purple Foxes, a Marine helicopter squadron. She went to serve in Iraq, flying a CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter.

This Wednesday she was flying aboard one of the Sea Knight, when it went down. She and six other crewmen died there in a field just outside of Baghdad.

Please, if you think the amount of time given over to ANS is worth it, give the lady a couple of minutes to know her. If not, it is good to be reminded that this fight is more than stats, broken promises, and candidates.

A new search, for Science.

Pharyngula has a story about a new search engine from MnCSE - the Minnesota Citizens for Science Education.

The MnCSE Real Science Search Engine searches the whole web, just like Google, but omits several hundred noisy, ignorant, creationist sites. You can actually search for topics like "origin of life" or "dinosaur footprints" without being inundated by silliness from the Discovery Institute or Kent Hovind. It's like wiping the bugs off your windshield and suddenly being able to see.

The second one is really picky - the MnCSE Snow White Search Engine searches only educational and government sites. No commercialism or creationism allowed (this one is like removing the windshield).

It might be nice to be able to not have to dig the the trash to get the pearls.

The conservative view of space.

Feministing has a good entry on IWF - Independent Women's Forum. It is a conservative forum for women. You know how much conservatives love women. They know what they really need, and where they belong.

Best of all they know the type of men to listen to. Lke the ad for Newt Gingrich, he has a healthy view on women, especially the ones in his life.





So here is a view on women astronauts and their place in space.

Remember when we just had guy astronauts? It would be hard to imagine Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin and John Glenn as a love triangle. Hmmmm. Does this stir any thoughts for those who oppose women on submarines?

Nice, huh?

How far we've come.

On Andrew Sullivan's site, he is linking to an old ad by Amnesty International.

It shows the horrors of waterboarding.

Obviously it was about those countries that would dare use such techniques, such obvious torture.

Now, we know better. It is just information gathering.

Ahhh, how times have changed. We truly have become wiser.

A thought on whose thinking about '08

From Daily Kos, a thought on the coming races.

It seems a day doesn't go by on this site without diaries and comments complaining about focus on the 2008 election. While I understand the desire for a little down time between election cycles, a Reuters article this morning reminds why it’s important we don’t succumb to election fatigue: because the right doesn't. Ever.

Not in the mood to think about '08. Don't worry, Jerry Farwell will. Don't worry, take a nap. Falwell will take care of things

Sweet dreams.

Conservative judgement

Time and again we hear that we need to give the White House 6 months or so to finish the job in Iraq. Or that we need to trust them on Social Security or Health Care.

Yet look at the results of Bush leadership and decision making. Look at his chosen mangers and what they wrought. Look at Cheney. Look at good old Rummy. Look at Rice and her success rate. Look at Frist making medical calls on the Senate floor. ANd on down the list.

And we need to rely on these people, why?

Here is another fun example, as reprted on on Daily Kos. It happens with Jonah Goldberg.

Anyway, I do think my judgment is superior to his when it comes to the big picture. So, I have an idea: Since he doesn't want to debate anything except his own brilliance, let's make a bet. I predict that Iraq won't have a civil war, that it will have a viable constitution, and that a majority of Iraqis and Americans will, in two years time, agree that the war was worth it. I'll bet $1,000 (which I can hardly spare right now).

As of today that bet has come due. Guess who didn't win it? Yeah, Jonah.

Guess who is refusing to pay up.

Why...

It is just plain odd. At Talking Points Memo. They have a story about how now the Christian Coalition of America is getting in the middle of this spitball fight over Pelosi and secure flights home.

Christian Coalition of America condemns the new Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, Democrat from San Francisco, for trying to get luxurious travel paid for by the American taxpayers.

Why? Why are they getting in here? WHy are they concerned or interested in involving themselves?

Sure the rest have, agendas, axes to grind, and ignorance. But aren't they busy condemning society and attacking "alternative" culture?

Is almost wonder...

so she can transport her political cronies, favorite Members of Congress, congressional staffers, friends and relatives back and forth to her district in San Francisco every week.

cronies...friends...San Francisco!

You don't think...that they actually think...that...they...No! They aren't that dumb and paranoid...Actually...


With these people the nuttiest things go on in the vast vacuum between the ears.

Echo. Echo. Echo. Echo.

Pentagon has started picking teams

At Daily Kos, there is talk of a curious meeting held by Major General Kenneth Hunzeker, the Army officer in charge of the Iraqi police training program. Who was he meeting? Bloggers. A curious selection? A random groupoing? Well, so far the Daily Kos can find no one with even a hint of left-leaning (commie-pink-liberals) asked to it.

Why though?

Well, if you only pick the bloggers who are habitually toadying to the White House, you get questions like: "why are we winning so quickly?", "Why are we go great?", "Can anything kill the Grimus?" You know cutting and informative questions.

From Daily Kos:

Yes, by only talking to the war-supporting arm of the blogosphere, the highly partisan rightwing side of the blogosphere, the Pentagon can find an outlet for all of the "good news" coming out of Iraq, that good news that the damned liberal media just refuses to report on. Including bloggers from the left would certainly have meant for some tough questions for Major Gen. Hunzeker, and it would have been a good deal more difficult to tout those successes.

Bill O'Reilly says thoughtless things, and then won't apologize.

Yeah talking about O'Reilly,and spotting his flaws, is like shooting fish in a barrel. But Crooks and Liars has video of an interview with Catherine Crier, from Court TV, on Countdown with Keith Olbermann. Same old, same old. O'Reilly decries a child who was abused, and says he asked for it and liked it. Sick man. Say, remember Bill Donohue below? He said more or less the same thing. Anyone really surprised? Peas in a pod.



So with the lack of surprise in this story, the only notable thing is to point out Catherine Crier. If you haven't had a chance to hear it is worth it. She's a great legal expert. Smart, witty, and just exudes class and open impartial analysis. If you have Nancy Grace poisoning, she is a great alternative.

Social Conservatives? Check! Your Move.

News from Washington.

In Crooks and Liars, we have a interesting story of a new counter move against conservative cries against gay marriage.

You see, one of the major argument, and one of the rare ones where logic is tried, is that the reason to marry is for procreation. If you can't procreate, apprarently only IN your marriage, you shouldn't marry.

Well, their is a new response to this, beyond the logical one of "you got to be fucking kidding me".

Meet Initiative 957:

An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled.

Pretty simple. If the hetero couples aren't or can't complete "the basic function of marriage", why are they even married. SHould make sense to conservatives.

I bet they love the idea! Afterall, it is just a matter of embracig their logic...They do beleive this argument, right?

Bush Administration, paging Mr. Orwell. Paging Mr. Orwell.

Yeah, yeah. I know. 1984-GW, that's a NEW comparison.

Still, it is shocking how comparable Bush's Boys make themselves. How can you do it this well without trying to do it?

You have had the redefining of words. Words replaced...Remember Homicide Bomber? The White House loved it. The correspondents liked. But reporters, no. The public, no. That was quite a time, you really realized people were just not buying EVERYTHING fed them anymore.

But they continued on, new enemies, new people to hate.

Now they are on to the next plagarizing of the book.

As Pharyngula goes into, now they are rewriting history. Lovely.


Those guys...Really, doesn't feel some days like they are really trying to be that creepy?

Just to be clear.

There are plenty of reasons to be snarky.

Why do the cable channels cut away from ANYTHING and EVERYTHING when a plane has "trouble", or their is a car chase?

The news worthiness? NO.

The importance? NO.

They want to record and broadcast a nasty crash, or a "miraculous" save. Though with the crash they can go on and on. It's a cheap thrill for the audience, it's slowing down and taking a good look at an accident. This is a chance to make someones death into a event to boost rating, to gawk, and to make her a spectacle one last time. Why would any of us want to be, in any way, a part of this?

Again, that is why we can be snarky. This event is not worth upending everything to make a spectacle (So Larry King's regular practice of making a meal of these sorts of things gives me a special dislike of him.). It is not the nicest thing to say, but it is just true. This isn't a good use of the airwaves.

Someone, almost no one really knew or cared about (Gawking and Ogling does not count. Being your choice of an example of "What's wrong with.." also doesn't count.) has passed.

Let those who loved her mourn her.

Good bye. Now back to the war. Because Death's work is far from done tonight.


I...Sorry if this all seems cold. It is very cold.

This is a tragedy, to her family. If I knew them they would have my condolences, I guess, as a matter of courtesy they do at that.

But as a society we do really love to put ourselves in these stories/events. A person dies, or a crash occurs, we do really love to make it about ourselves. How does it affect me?

We need to grow out of this. It is not empathy, it's self-gratification.

But that is just how I see it.

Big -SHOCKING- News

CNN has decided to postpone until Friday its makeup piece on Atheism.

Yes, a big story has broke. Anna Nic...I am not going to waste time and energy writing her name on my own damn blog. Suffice to say, this is a big story...because...sigh, sadly, looking at Olbermann on MSNBC he is talking about how her death is affecting people...WHAT! Keith...COME ON!


I am sad for her daughter's loss, and the limbo it is leaving the child in, but...

You know, people are dying in sickening numbers in Africa, from bigotry, ignorance, illness, and starvation, people are being gunned down and blown apart in shocking numbers in Iraq, people are dying everywhere. Please, let us be honest here. She was someone whose main claim to fame was gold digging, weight loss, and chemical imbalance (No one even remembers she was in a Naked Gun film.). How sad is it that more time is spent mourning the loss of this woman than, say, the creator of a world changing medicine, or a foreign dignitary who ends a war, somewhere.

Guess they didn't make good TV. That is a sad statement on our nation.

The Edwards Dilemma

If you have been looking at various blogs and news sources you may have seen the surge of anger cattiness.


Edwards set up a site and blog to encourage discussion and share information. The people hired to handle this, Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan. In their previous lives, as bloggers on Pandagon and Shakespeare's Sister, made comments that have been deemed by some (Right-Wing) as cruel, crude, and vile. You would need to look up what was said for you to judge them. Suffice to say, they were not glowing praise of Catholicism. And when Bill Donohue, of the Catholic League (in no way affiliated with the Justice League), comes out upset, it must be bad...oh wait, no. He'll come out if you don't act like, become, or praise Catholicism. He's a premium nutter. Coo-coo for coco puffs.

With the "outrage" came pressure to dump the 2 bloggers, for actions unrelated to their current work. For some, like PZ Meyer, it was a litmus test for John Edwards as a candidate.

The likes of Michelle Malkin and Bill Donohue, those are an important constituency for Democrats...wait.

So...what would Edwards do.

As shown on Crooks and Liars,

The Edwards Campaign:

The Edwards campaign just released statements from Edwards and the two bloggers in the thick of the controversy, and it looks as if the two won't be fired. The statement says Edwards was "personally offended" by their writings, but that he also believes in "giving everyone a fair shake" and that he's "talked" to the bloggers, that they've assured him "that it was never their intention to malign anyone's faith," and that he takes them "at their word."

So Edwards chose the better angels of his nature. Good for him, and anyone else a part of this decision. He chose the right people to snub, the ones who had no interest in his agenda to help people, the ones only looking for something to complain about. Brilliant.


But as is pointed out, this is VERY early in the campaign season. This is one of the first Swiftboat maneuvers. More will be coming down river. We hall have to be ready, to help, at the very least, keep reality in sight. If their are people like Malkin who are working hard to drown us all in minutia. Don't let her, or anyone else snow job you. You owe it to yourself.


Daily Kos has more on the blog battle

The Edwards campaign just released statements from Edwards and the two bloggers in the thick of the controversy, and it looks as if the two won't be fired. The statement says Edwards was "personally offended" by their writings, but that he also believes in "giving everyone a fair shake" and that he's "talked" to the bloggers, that they've assured him "that it was never their intention to malign anyone's faith," and that he takes them "at their word."

.


Oh, and for those loking to suffer some more, here is an article on Media Matters. It gives you a look at Bill Donohue, Catholic League president. Much has been made at just how hurt he is as a Catholic to read the nasty things said about his faith. He love the word anti-Catholic.

A couple of his classics, look at the link for more:

"People don't trust the Muslims when it comes to liberty."
"[W]hy didn't you just smack the clergyman in the face? After all, most 15-year-old teenage boys wouldn't allow themselves to be molested. So why did you?"

and the classic deluxe

"Well, look, there are people in Hollywood, not all of them, but there are some people who are nothing more than harlots. They will do anything for the buck. They wouldn't care. If you asked them to sodomize their own mother in a movie, they would do so, and they would do it with a smile on their face."


His poor, poor sensitive nature, indeed.

Pelosi-Not-a-Gate -- Let's see if we can break this down.

Okay. Apparently the MSM has some trouble with this story. It is SO complicated and confusing, it is fusing their motherboards and sending them in to epic tizzy fits.


So can me break this down and get to the heart of it.


Gee I bet it will be REALLY hard. Even with some help from Talking Points Memo

Statement from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):

From an interview for FOX (really) news:

They told me the first day that I was supposed to go that I couldn't make it across the country. And I said well, that's fine, I'm going commercial. ... I'm not asking to go on that plane. If you need to take me there for security purposes, you're going to have to get a plane that goes across the country, because I'm going home to my family. ... I'm happy to go commercial. But they want me to go on this plane, so the issue was distance, not size. And again, it's not about having a plane. It's about having transportation. These planes are used for other purposes in between trips, which are, you know, take place once or twice a week, going or coming. So, it isn't about that. But there are probably those in the Department of Defense who are not happy with my criticism of Secretary Rumsfeld, the war in Iraq, other waste, fraud and abuse in the Defense Department and I guess this is their way of making their voices heard. But it has nothing to do, as I say, with the president of the United States. He has encouraged my having the security I need.

So she wants a plane to travel safely home to California. Making a nonstop trip lessens terrorist threats or weather/mechanical trouble threats. Simple enough. The Speaker wants to go straight home quick and safe. In this time of terror, as the Republicans like to harp on it, their is a need to ensure security, especially for people like, say, the 3rd in line for the Presidency. Seems pretty straight forward. Right?

So word got out she wanted a private plane. The horror! Trouble is that the previous Speaker was granted this, as a way to keep him safe. Now the new Speaker wants a similar courtesy, a plane to take one home, nonstop. In this case, instead of to Illinois, to California. Simple enough?

Now more insight, from Talking Points Memo.

From The Sergeant-At-Arms of the House.

For Immediate Release
February 8, 2007

As the Sergeant at Arms, I have the responsibility to ensure the security of the members of the House of Representatives, to include the Speaker of the House. The Speaker requires additional precautions due to her responsibilities as the leader of the House and her Constitutional position as second in the line of succession to the presidency.

In a post 9/11 threat environment, it is reasonable and prudent to provide military aircraft to the Speaker for official travel between Washington and her district. The practice began with Speaker Hastert and I have recommended that it continue with Speaker Pelosi. The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable. This will ensure communications capabilities and also enhance security. I made the recommendation to use military aircraft based upon the need to provide necessary levels of security for ranking national leaders, such as the Speaker. I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue.

So he corroborates her story and stand. Anyone confused yet?

So Pelosi, her office, and the HSAA all agree. Meaning the person who made the request, the person who handled the request are in unison, that only leaves the person who got the request, the DoD. THEY must have made the statement that she made unreasonable requests.

Hmm? No mention of that? Odd?

So...Where is this story coming from? Who is providing support for this story?

And...WHY DOESN"T THIS INTEREST THE MEDIA? I know, dumb question.

As it is maybe someone was too chatty at the DoD (that is a pleasant thought), and let a friend in Republican PR in on the request, and the spin began.

But, after so many lives loss, after so many costs, on so many levels...For Pete sake MSM, freaking GET-A CLUUUUEEE!

Here's a bone for you guys, okay? Why doesn't the DoD want the new Speaker of the House(Also 3rd in line from the Presidency, Democrat, Critic of a number of the DoD actions in the past few years) to have the security and courtesy they saw as critical for the previous Speaker? Why deny her that safety? Any interest there? Hmm?


I know, say she's out of control, crazy with power, unable to lead, and/or derailing the party. Cause that is the story you've picked already.

And like the White House, why wait and work with reality.

AMERICAblog and ABC News have more.

Copter Quandry

As you may have noticed in the news in the passed weeks. Helicopter mortality in the Iraq campaign has taken a sudden upturn, even as the military try and take steps to stave off further losses they continue. It seems, as the New York Times suggests, new insurgents tactics are at work.

At Talking Points Memo, they have updates as the number of losses goes up to 6 copters. As well they have links to articles on the history of attack copters and troubles.

Juan Cole, of Informed Comment fame, talks about the latest losses, including 7 GI's, and an eyewitness claim of rocket fire on the helicopter.

Troubling news, that if all true, means we will many more losses. Very sad, and very troubling.

CNN, aiming to disappoint.

Over at Pharyngula, PZ Meyer has further notes on tonight's Paula Zahn show. Looks like while they clenched, it may be for reasons other than we hoped.

Tonight they will revamp the story of the atheist being ostracized, then have FOUR MINUTES of a Richard Dawkins interview. Then another 3 person panel. This time it will have Niger Innis,a very conservative republican, Roland Martin, a religious leader, and Christopher Hitchens, alcoholic/Middle East Mastermind/Atheist).

What's worse, edited down Dawkins, or another Brit to rep American atheism? STILL, they can't find an American? And they pick the alcoholic one, who shows up tipsy on camera more than Paula Abdul. Still he is a surly and nasty opponent, if he can stay in his seat, oh right, they stand. But he is pugnacious and tough.

And, again, 4 minutes of Dawkins. You get such a lauded scientist and noted atheist and that's all you want? Come on!

It seems like they want to put an effort forward. But a minimum one. In four minutes Dawkins can say a lot. In 10 minutes he could give a lot of good cogent information to Zahn in an interview. But, maybe that isn't what they want tonight.


One can only hope that CNN isn't filling Hitchens' green room. But I have often wondered if that is Bill Maher's strategy with him on his own show.

It's sad that now I have trouble putting that passed CNN.

Still, I will need to see tonight (7PM Central). But I have that much less hope for the show.


CNN, lowering expectation, news cycke by news cycle.

The Richardson Foreign Policy

In all the talk of "front runners", long before we should even think we have any, people and stories get missed.


Among them will likely be the ideas of candidates like Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico.

At Daily Kos, they have the layout of his foreign policy proposal. The first, "repairing international alliances by working with traditional allies and reengaging them in our foreign policy". Sensible. Take a look at the rest.

There is also video of him at the DNC winter meeting.

Get to know the candidates!

BREAKING NEWS

Is it that a plane may or may not have landing gear trouble...oh, no...never mind. [If you had a news channel on yesterday afternoon, you sat through this 5 to 10 minute nonevent.]

No, in fact it is the sound of CNN jumping back in a panic. Apparently the move of the "near nonexistent" pro-Atheist lot has slapped the network up side the head. I imagine letter, calls, and a whole host of imagined blogging (big timers and us wee folk) have gotten the exec clenching tight.

What's happening, ask RichardDawkins.net. Dawkins is comin' to town...well, CNN. So there is actually some value in checking out Paula Zahn tonight.

Apparently, they plan to rerun the sad story of that family, as seen in the posted video. Then they will follow up with an interview with Dawkins. As Pharyngula suggests, this is damage control. And PZ Meyer has a good point. Having a whole panel of atheist would have engendered a broader conversation. Heck, I wish they would bring in another theist, and allow debate, allow Dawkins to show the vacuousness of the ridiculous theistic claims against atheist.

And definitely think they could have found an American atheists to talk with, as so many of the shrill claims of before were about attacks on their vision of "Americana". So Dawkins ability to talk to these things will be limited. But the man is brilliant, stunningly articulate, and plain fun to listen to. So as a rep to atheism in general, as an expert to dissuade the more egregious fears...He won't do so bad at that...Check out the God Delusion.



For more talk on the previous show, and how much it has ticked people off.
Austin Cline has down two articles on about.com 1 2 - For some reason I got quoted here...Is someone watching and following me...WHERE'S MY TINFOIL?


And if you want some more flavor from that austere panel:

Check out the latest piece out of Debbie Schlussel's strange mind.

Among her many thoughts is that atheists are soon-to-be Islamic militants. Why? One guy, who had an atheist mom did it. Apparently that is a statistically significant piece of evidence. Who needs research and reason, when you got a mind like this?

It is the beauty of a closed mind, great echo chamber.

This silly silly person is just in a long line desperate to be the next Anne Coulter or Michelle Malkin. And like the host seeking to be the next Limbaugh or Hannity...just shake you head and move on to the people who need to be talked to. These people are there own worse enemies, they live in their own personal hells.

BUUUT...If you would like to kick this expert about some more, or would like to see someone tear thoroughly through her words, check out Pharyngula, where PZ Meyer turns her into a feast with his insight.

Religious War on Science

Some might see this as just some hyperbole. But science is constantly dealing with people and groups trying to rewrite the various science books. Not with research, analysis, or evidence. No, just faith and gumption. Geology, astronomy, physics, biology, archaeology, down the line.

So now to a story that has been making the rounds for months now. RichardDawkins.net has an article on the continued struggle with zealots, who just don't appreciate reality, especially when it is let out of the locked closet, in the out of order bathroom, in the basement, passed the missing stairs, and the locked door.

In Nairobi, Kenya, we find a continued struggle between Kenya's national museum and Bishop Boniface Adoyo, leader of Kenya's numerous evangelical denominations (He counts his followers around 10 million).

His demand:

He's calling on his flock to boycott the exhibition and has demanded the museum relegate the fossil collection to a back room -- along with some kind of notice saying evolution is not a fact but merely one of a number of theories.

So he wants archaeological finds and relics hidden, because they don't agree with his religion and unfounded opinions. No doubt if some item called into question Buddhism, Islam, or Judaism, he would be leading the fight against it.

"I did not evolve from Turkana Boy or anything like it," says Bishop Boniface Adoyo..."These sorts of silly views are killing our faith."

So facts, are hurting religion. Sort of like when faith healing doesn't heal someone, it is the fault of the sick and infirmed.

More than 10,000 years of humanity, billions of years of planetary existence. How can this be allowed to stand against...Oh yeah, because it just is. If you don't like the results you can't trade them in, like the results of a medical tests. NO BARGAINING.

Now enters a hero, though I want to give accolades to all the other scientist, curators, researchers, etc hard at work in Kenya, one Richard Leakey. The same Leakey that set up and led the expedition that discovered Turkana Boy, along Lake Turkana.

Among the 160,000 fossils due to go on display is an imprint of a lizard left in sedimentary rock, dating back 200 million years, at a time when the Earth's continents were only beginning to separate.

Dinosaur fossils and a bone from an early human ancestor, dating back 7 million years, will also be on show along with the bones of short-necked giraffes and elephants whose tusks protrude from their lower jaws.

Followers of creationism believe in the literal truth of the Genesis account in the Bible that God created the world in six days. Bishop Adoyo believes the world was created 12,000 years ago, with man appearing 6,000 years later. He says each biblical day was equivalent to 1,000 Earth years.

So you have Genesis, and the reading of it, or evidence and research, replicated, validated, and repeatedly reviewed. Hmm...tough one.

Leakey fears the ideological spat may provoke an attack on the priceless collection, one largely found during the 1920s by his paleontologist parents, Louis and Mary Leakey, who passed their fossil-hunting traditions on to him.
...
Turkana Boy will be displayed in a private room, with limited access and behind a glass screen with 24-hour closed-circuit TV. Security guards will be at the entrance.

"There are issues about the security," said Dr. Emma Mbua, the head of paleontology at the museum. "These fossils are irreplaceable and we wouldn't want anything to happen to them."

Fear looms, as thoughts of Christ-like actions come to mind.


But on the the positive side of the books.

Adoyo's evangelical coalition is the only religious group voicing concern about the exhibition.

Mbua, a Protestant, is a little taken aback at the controversy but has no problems reconciling her own faith to the scientific evidence.

"Evolution is a fact," adds Mbua, who has run the department for the last five years.

"Turkana Boy is our jewel," she said. "For the first time, we will be taking him out of the strong room and showing our heritage to the world."

Religion doesn't default to madness and nuttery. Great, but that is the great thing about a secular society.

And, yeah, Adoyo's group is alone, but it is, in effect, the whole of the evangelicals, some 10 million strong.

The trouble is that people like Adoyo don't want this type of open secular society to rise or survive. It is a danger and concern we need to be all aware of and ready to argue against.

Be aware. Be active.

One more thought.

The Paula Zahn show talked of below could have been instructive. A lesson in nutty and pathetic paranoid bigotry.

It started off with the sad story of abuse of a family.

But they chose to bring in people, most of whom, were inclined to be vindictive and cruel. How can this not be read as intent, and why the sports guy...

So, a chance to help a small group (Percent wise (Not 3%) it is in the 12 or so percent, then add in those unwilling to admit to being it, that number inches up slightly.), who are seen as worth than Islamic militants (U of MN research). I guess that would hamper the naetworks Red State dreams of being the new FOX news. Way dream...scary nasty dreams.

It could almost be seen as a lesson. "See how bad it is?" But no. Zahn has never shown erself to be that sharp, subtle, or wiley.


Thankfully they have the brilliant and amazing Christiane Amanpour, the determined and resourceful Michael Ware in Iraq, Anderson Cooper, who has been kicking Sylvia Browne's sorry backside recently, even the loveablly crotchety Jack Cafferty. These people deserve accolades. They make me hope CNN will learn better.

Hope, but only so much.

Atheists, shut up!

This week on CNN's Paula Zahn Now, a show that has been enjoying prurient sensationalism by digging into various bigotry, has apparently gotten around to Atheists. Here is the video of it.

It starts out being about a family is being ostracized for their...lack of belief. For instances, days after confiding to a friend that the wife was an atheist, their friends started distancing themselves, and then their landlord evicted them. In school the kids are isolated, at home and work they get harassing calls and treatment.

It takes me back to earlier comments.

Tell [Christians] you are [Jewish], they will nod (Presuming they are not far out nutters.) Tell [them] you are an atheist, and they ask if you had considered embracing [Jesus]. It can't be that you can live, move, and breath, without it.

Now add on the further point of being damned, by people, to hell. Being ostracized.


So the show looks to start well. But as the sad story ends, they bring in a fellow of First Things, a Christian media group, who quickly needs to make the point that it is all the fault of militant atheists. They are the problem. Some people don't want God on money, or in a pledge. So that is why atheists are kicked around. It is not as if atheists were put upon before, say the God was put on the coin, or before even the pledge was written. Heck, no. If that were so, then this argument would point to the nastiness and cruelty coming more from the insult/fear of someone questioning/denying divinity. They can't handle that, at least the more intelligent of the belligerent can't. They can't have it that way, they just got to have a rational reason, not some primal rage at the strangers in their midsts.

To quote one of the many threads on this show:

"Nobody" likes to be challenged, uncovered, and exposed as idiotic. Especially people who consider themselves intelligent movers and shakers.

{Also my skeptics have it so hard at times. No one likes to have the dream disrupted. DOn't tell people their are no fairies/unicorns/alien probes/dragons/gods. Even an old jaded skeptic can get no rspect for standing up for empiricism.]

And so begins the rest of the show (from Pharyngula). Also known as, now that they are down crowd around and kick the shit out of them. Is this how the rest of her shows of bigotry have gone?

Listen, we are a Christian nation. I'm not a Christian. I'm Jewish, but I recognize we're a Christian country and freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion.

-Debbie Schlussel, Paula Zahn Now

One of many charming lines from the show's panel.

Three people on the panel. Two Christians, and one Jew (quoted above).

Good round group, hmm. No Atheists, not even an agnostic. Why? No atheists wanted to show up? What about all those screaming psycho atheists? You know the ones just alluded to. And they will alluded to again and again for the rest of the show.

Why do atheists inspire such hatred?

From here on in it is all about why Atheists are nasty. THEY won't let us pray (Anyone unable to pray?). THEY won't let us say the pledge (Anyone there?). THEY won't let us have our particular money (Oh wait, we do.). THEY cry wolf. And so on, and so forth.

More on Effect Measure. As they quote on.

ZAHN: ... So do you think atheists should keep their religious beliefs secret? What's their beliefs period?
HUNTER: What does an atheist believe? Nothing. I think this is such a ridiculous story. Are we now going to take "In God We Trust" off of our dollars? Are we going to not say "one nation under God?" When does it end? We took prayer out of schools. What more do they want? ...

So Zahn asks a dumb question, as imagine that question with Jews as they subject...Disturbed yet? In fact watch the talk and imagine, a religion or a race instead of atheist. Do you imagine Mel Gibson and Michael Richards on the panel to?

And what is the answer, quick dismissal and on to the attack. Is there some atheist front calling for this stuff? No.

Does she not know prayer is allowed in school? It is. MANDATORY prayer is out. You think that is what she really missed.

If they had hallmark cards, maybe they wouldn't feel so left out.

Maybe if we had Winter holidays, but I wonder if these very upset people are also flustered over "HAPPY HOLIDAYS".

I think that the real discrimination is atheists against Americans who are religious.

Geez, if their is a higher power, strike me now. Once again the 90 some percent are the victims...victims of hearing contrary positions. Where do I send the relief donations.

Look where there are more atheists and where they've lost God, where the church is not that strong. Europe is becoming Islamist. It's fast falling and intolerance is increasing. That's the one reason our country has not become like Europe because we have strong Christians and because atheists are not strong. And I think that's a good thing.

Yeah, I'm sure this was well thought out, and not remotely sensationalistic or unfounded.

...but I recognize we're a Christian country and freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion.

More brilliant thinking. Actually, freedom religion DOES mean freedom from it. How else can it be free? How...eh!

The only one in the group able to consider something other than his victimization. That is the ESPN analyst...why is a sports guy there...to discuss religion and atheists? What? I guess they needed a fourth in the room, who had an once of sense in his head. Not the most brilliant thinking, but he didn't feel all that victimized and had some sympathy.

I don't think they need to shut up. The reason why I don't think they need to shut up is because there's a whole bunch of people in this world that we can look at and say they need to shut up and they certainly don't. You got everybody fighting for their own individual cause. This is their cause. We might not like it. I don't agree with it at all, but they do have a right. ...

Yes atheists have a right to fight for...whatever. But why even go there? Do atheists need to have their rights enshrined more? Maybe in Texas.

Some more quotes.

..I really believe that they are the ones who are the intolerant ones against Christians. ...

They are on the attack. It's obnoxious and they do need to shut up. ...

...

And on it went.


So why are atheists put upon, picked on, mistreated. Because they deserve it. Apparently atheists victimize and use everyone around them. Do they steal children in the night as well?

That's what Paula Zahn taught me.


Wow, CNN... I really feel informed about the issues now.

Respecting your elders

Over at RichardDawkins.net, they have a story of turmoil in England.

Pagan groups, whatever that means want "the bodies". Apparently it is felt that remains of early (pre-Christian) peoples of England are their providence, and only they know how to handle and respect the remains.

That seems damn presumptutous. Most everyone in England have as much a claim to these remains as these groups. Just because they are "Pagan" they don't have truer tie. We are talking about a religion, one that can really include celtic offshoots, wiccans, a multitude of different pagan groups, different druidics), that is at best a reborn faith of the last 2 centuries.

Now some like to belittle the various groups under the pagan mantle, but really, I have as many and more troubles with Christianity goofiness, or the creepiness of Scientology. But this attitiude needs to be confronted.

Yes. Confronted for the good of science. It reminds me of a story I heard on the Skeptic's Guide to the Universe podcast. In it some archaelogists were working on a grave site. An American Indian showed up with the press, demanding the remains. THe odd thing is that this grave was one for Irish immigrants. What the hell is this? It is old and in the grounds of North American, therefor it is Indian? No.

No. Again, we are talking about a broader history. Tens of thousands of years ago (per current research) the first peoples migrated to this continent. Some stopped here and there, and settled, eventually, there were pockets up and down the 2 continents of the Americas. After that peoples died out flourished and moved about. So for a tribe or group to declare dibs on remain's thousands of years old, is arrogant.

I am all for respecting cultures. But to deingrate science, to deny research in this way is foolish. There is a level of compromise to be found, I am sure, but to just capitulate is the wrong way to go. Hence the changes to U.S. Law to make the fight to claim remains harder, without real direct evidence.

Super Bowl ads

Not So Good Ad

Bad Astronomy talks about the ad that bugged Phil Plaitt. It was from Fed Ex, involving a moon base, and the abuse of science facts.



Whatever Your Saying, It's Just Wrong, Ad

AMERICAblog talks about the Snickers ad, where 2 guys kiss over a Snickers, ala Lady and the Tramp...two guys accidentally kiss, and are disgusted. Not great, but Idon't know how much it worries me. Still it is an interactive ad, with 3 possible endings. First, a very gay enters and asks to joing. Not showing a basic sensitivity. Second, they drink toxic mix to clean up. Death before dishonor. Last, they physically bash each other. Uh...

They aren't helped by the fact that the Mars family is a major contributor to conservative candidates and causes.

Human Rights Campaign and GLAAD are up in arms.

Since now the Mars and Snickers companies have promised to pull the ads/ Also the web version and not run them any longer.

The Blasphemy Challenge

The Blasphemy Challenge, it is a little old to bring up.

But in case you haven't, check out this video of what it is here. The link also has interviews about it.

Including, a bugged interviewer, interviewing for ABC's Nightline.

Also, a deranged enraged FOX commentator, who apparently cannot stand anyone forsaking his dark Gods.

Funny how freaked out religious people get when people suggests they are wrong, more precisely when they shun the whole of religion. They could laugh at the "foolishness". A different religion proselytizes, they may not like it, but it is usually shrugged off (INSERT example to the contrary here.). But suggest and go around suggesting no god/gods/magic trees...BOOM...

Tell [Christians] you are [Jewish], they will nod (Presuming they are not far out nutters.) Tell [them] you are an atheist, and they ask if you had considered embracing [Jesus]. It can't be that you can live, move, and breath, without it.

There are also more on the first link.


Addendum:

Oh yeah. I deny that the Holy Spirit exists. Since I see no empirical support for it's existence, it doesn't, nor will I fall on my knees in fear at the supposition of ifs and maybes, or wishes and horses. I don't think St. Nick, the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, or Old Scratch are real in any way more than a song or a poem is real.

If you think otherwise, eh. To each his own, as long as we aren't forcing our beliefs. Doesn't mean I can't express my opinions and logic, or that it is wrong.


I have long thought it might be for the best to not be too specific in my thoughts on religion. Better to not prevent or dissuade conversation. Hence putting religious perspective on politics sites in my links. But it is wrong for one of the many perspectives to be obliged to hide itself so others "feel better". Too many liberal speakers have asked atheists and agnostics to shut up and get in back. It is wrong. No. All voices should be welcomed.

A troubled anniversary

Over at Atrios's they are looking back at today's anniversary. The day Collin Powell sold the war in Iraq. Remember the transcripts that had Iraqi's warning of the need to hide their weapons from America? Remember the photos of the weapons moving around? The yellow cake? The vial shook in the world's face? Hmm?

Well, plenty of us do. Some disbelieved from the start. Some of us were worried about if it was all true, but also troubled by the fact some many other sources were pointing to a lack of WMD's. We also watched people arguing against the WMD's being tarnished, accused of unfounded crimes, treason of thought, and generally shunned.

So drop by Atrios's and read some of the oldies, but goodies, from the wonderous times when American thought it could fly...over to Iraq knock out the government, set up anew government, and have the worlds dicatators and liberals collpase all at once and a new Age of Conservatism would rise for a 1,000 year reign of peace and family values (Christian, of course.).

Of this wasn't your mindset?


...Sure...

A Plan for Health Care

At Crooks and Liars they have video of John Edwards' plan to improve U.S. health care.

Some don't like to improve health care, the government will need additional funds (taxes). You can debate it, but people know the truth (of course, people have voted against the truth in the past). But the sad response is the this dumb quip that seems to keep popping up, something about him going and adding another wing/room to his house/mansion. ...Uh, yeah, he's made money...the HORROR! I guess he didn't know that only the impoverished can fight for those at economic disadvantage. It's the excuse the Republicans must use to justify it in their moments of regret.

Stands clearly in his stance against the war in Iraq, planning for improving health care, interested in improving things for people put upon by the more wealthy and powerful. He definitely should not be counted out in the race, for the sakes of Clinton and Obama. But he has plenty of time to stumble, not everyone can do it right out of the gate.

Breaking the Chain

Well, it has been awhile. It has also been a tumultuous time. Surgery, motherboard burnouts, procrastination, travel, murder, pregnancies, doomsday devices...you know, the normal January.

So I wanted to put things in the proper perspective and start things out well as the year started, in the midst of trouble. So I ended up procrastinating and then stories and events came up I wanted to chat about and didn't and somehow that made me procrastinate more.

So, screw it all, time to break that old Chain of mine, where I hold off on something until it vanishes, dies, or slips into a parallel dimension.

I'm back baby.

So, no more excuses to not posts and bring up inane points and topics. Cause I got a load of them.

So happy new year, and what about that Watergate, hmm?