Another assumption that was briskly dismantled, was the idea that religion offers certainty. On the contrary, argued Gray: "In an age of secular dogmatism, churches have become sanctuaries of doubt." It's a statement that will horrify Dawkins's many fans, but given so few of them ever grace a church's doorstep, how would they know?
Armstrong was offering no certainty even on the existence of God. Existence is far too limited a human concept to apply to God – even the great 12th-century Jewish philosopher Maimonides knew that. Yet modernity has lost this understanding of the limits to human reasoning and our incapacity to describe God, which was evident in all the monotheistic traditions in the past. Uncertainty has, traditionally, always been part of faith.Mostly had to put this out here so I remember to get the book and read it. I'm convinced that we are beset by people that know "too much" and "too little" about everything from God to Government to Humanity.
Marco Rubio: Why I Won't Vote to Raise the Debt Limit - WSJ.com
"Raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure." So said then-Sen. Obama in 2006, when he voted against raising the debt ceiling by less than $800 billion to a new limit of $8.965 trillion. As America's debt now approaches its current $14.29 trillion limit, we are witnessing leadership failure of epic proportions.
Oh wait, that was in '06, the "epic" hadn't got going yet ... he was going to close Gitmo, thought any use of US forces against mideast dictators was bad (oh, he had more bombastic words than that, but the idea was the same), and thought "transparency" was important. Oops ... different guy, but he is a Democrat, so the MSM seems to find it all OK ."whatever"
It is time for the rest of us to get out of the race to destruction -- good column by Rubio, NOW is the time to turn the debt corner!
"That's why building this international coalition has been so important," he said the other day. "It is our military that is being volunteered by others to carry out missions that are important not only to us, but are important internationally."
Four years ago, President Sarkozy hosted a state visit for Col. Gadhafi, his personal security detail of 30 virgins, his favorite camel and a 400-strong entourage that helped pitch his tent in the heart of Paris. Given that London and Paris have the third- and fourth-biggest military budgets on the planet and that between them they know everything about Gadhafi's elite troops, sleeping arrangements, guard-babes and dromedaries, why couldn't they take him out? But no: They, too, decided to volunteer the U.S. military.
The American Spectator : America's Accelerating Downward Spiral
I've been predicting it since we turned the political corner in '06 and put the Dems in the drivers seat. Winning back the house was nice, but the new Republicans are way short of agressive enough on dealing with the problem -- not that they could anyway, with Democrats in the Senate and BO in the WH. I find this guy to be slightly on the optimistic side, but what he points out in the current picture ought to be obvious to everyone drawing breath that isn't just completely in the liberal wacko tank:
Our dependence on the MSM has reached ridiculous proportions, after 8 years of Bush, we got used to a constant drumbeat of negative press even when things were going reasonably well. Now, any blip that could be looked as POTENTIALLY being positive is treated as manna from his worsshipfulness BO, while massive bad news on inflation, employment, federal policies, interest rates, effects of fuel prices, etc is just swept under the rug.
At some point we need to ALL throw politics and partisanship out the window and realize we have dug a deep deep hole of unsustainable policies for at least 80 years (since FDR). We have A LOT of work and a LOT of pain to get this turned around, but if we don't get rolling on in in 2012 and after, it may go so far that the beacon of freedom and prosperity that was bequeathed us by our founders, flickers and dies on our watch, the irresponsible baby boomers who failed in the challenge of keeping the American faith!
RealClearPolitics - Planet Washington
A good description of Democrat "frugality" ... you borrow 40% of a 10K budget to begin with and faced with the obvious need to cut your budget, you offer to spend $28 less!
But given their terror of forcing a government shutdown, Democrats were forced to counteroffer with a cut of $10.5 billion, or 0.28 percent of the federal budget.
Imagine you have a budget of $10,000 (about 40 percent of it borrowed on a credit card), then "slash" 28 bucks. That's what it's like to be a frugal Democrat.
Obama restarts Guantanamo trials - Yahoo! News
Remember when having Gitmo open was a horrible stain on the US? Remember when military tribunals were a HORRIBLE idea?-- even though FDR and others had used them? Well, we now have proof that Gitmo nor military tribunals ever really were a problem to the MSM/Democrats/left -- both of them were merely ways to harp on a subject and help to lower the popularity of Bush and Republicians in general. Why in the world do Democrats even have to spend a dime on political campaigns when they have the MSM working for them 24x7?
I really don't even understand the kind of mind that makes something like Gitmo/tribunals a major issue, and then is completely unconcerned about it when their party takes power. If there was ANY shred of interest in these items as a issue, they would have to be an issue under BO as well as under W, but it is absolutely clear they are not. Nobody in the MSM / Democrats / left cares one whit if BO ever gets Gitmo closed, nor that he as returned to using military tribunals. The only explanation that works for me is that it is TOTALLY "politics and power above ALL else" -- prosperity, security, freedom, character, truth ... nothing else matters!! There is NOTHING more sacred than "politics and power" -- but I just don't get it. To me, it is ONLY the principles/values that matter -- politics and power are ONLY a MEANS to hopefully move us toward more/better freedom, security, prosperity ... and to LESS poltics and power, because individuals have more liberty and responsiblility, so the government can have LESS!
One of the saddest things in America today is how much of the country has been convinced that "there are two sides to every story, and everyone has their facts". In fact, every side has N sides and there is no shortage of "facts" to support nearly any world view. The primary questions in life are actually of the sort "faith, world view, ideology". Those are the questions that allow the selections of which facts we prioritize, and even more imporantly, what we DO as a result of the important input from reality provided by facts.
Even when the facts are scrupulously and fairly presented, many world views that are not in alingment with them will continue -- difficult facts will be ignored or minimized, old information will be used rather than new, rosy projections will be presented as reality -- standard stuff. The problem with this story is that most of the MSM is effectively lying:
I'd rather we started fixing the nation by dealing with entitlements, but we are broken in a lot of places. Educating Americans on what is wrong with public unions is critical, this article does a good job of starting that process:
Why? Because unlike in the private economy, a public union has a natural monopoly over government services. An industrial union will fight for a greater share of corporate profits, but it also knows that a business must make profits or it will move or shut down. The union chief for teachers, transit workers or firemen knows that the city is not going to close the schools, buses or firehouses.
Opinion: The Left's Unhealthy Koch Habit
It is never enough for the left to have a discussion of issues. It must always be some sort of strange conspiracy, some "assault", in which making things up, running away, creating conspiracies out of whole cloth -- or ANYTHING, including violence is justfied because of "morality" of their cause. There can be no god but leftist mamon, since it is certain there would be more than one case in which he would not agree with them, and that may not be countenanced. You MUST buy the leftist view, or you will be declared apostate and destroyed. You have been warned! Get your mind right (er, left) !!
Good column, just read it.
What's really going on here is an attempt to silence people whose views liberals disagree with. After all, they don't have a problem with billionaires using their money to influence policies and public opinion when the money is being spent by the likes of George Soros, a left-winger who, among other things, helps fund the Think Progress site.
End Unions and End the Privileged Class - The Daily Beast
Here here! Well thought, well written, and to the point!
The primary purpose of public unions today, as ugly as it sounds, is to work against the financial interests of taxpayers: the more public employees are paid in wages and uncapped benefits, the less taxpayers keep of the money they earn. It’s time to call an end to the privileged class. And the White House makes a mistake if it thinks it can grow a manufactured and uncivil unrest into a popular movement. Voters will not follow those who flee.
Niall Ferguson: Americans and Revolutions - Newsweek
Ferguson is an academic, not an idealogue, I generally find the quality of his thought to be high, and this is no exception.
In the absence of an American strategy, the probability of a worst-case scenario creeps up every day—a scenario of the sort that ultimately arose in revolutionary France, Russia, and China. First the revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East could turn much more violent, with a death toll running into tens or hundreds of thousands. Then they could spark a full-blown war, claiming millions of lives. Worst of all, out of that war could emerge an enemy as formidable as Napoleon’s France, Stalin’s Soviet Union, or Mao’s China.
Yes, Americans love revolutions. But they should stick to loving their own.
RealClearPolitics - Who Benefits From Government Unions?
Democrats are always telling us that more government is the answer -- to the poor, to the old, in education, more laws, more regulation; why just recently they solemly told us that even our health care was better handled by the government, and they were so certain that was true that bypassing the fillibuster rules in the senate to shove their bloated legislation through was required. According to the MSM and tax funded Public Media, it was even courageous!
Why would it be that this government that we are all told to trust so much is not qualified to bargain individually with the people that work for it? I thought this government was benevolent, trustworthy, competent, big hearted, patient, good at listening, and a whole host of other positive characteristics too numerous to name. THat same government that we are to continue to hand ever increasing amounts of our cash, freedoms, choices and childrens protentials for a future over to must be bargained with collectively? Do we need a "tax payers union" that negotiates our taxes, and we can simply have a tax strike legally if they don't meet our demands?
We CONSTANTLY hear from the Democrats -- well, if you don't like something, just vote the other party out -- but wait, they don't follow the rules of government even when we DO vote them out, and based on the WI example, they are very willing to just run away to prevent the will of the voters from being carried it if that will doesn't agree with theirs.
Just read the Barone article -- the bottom line though is very very plain. Public sector unions are a built in way that Democrats can collect campaign money from taxpayers -- even those that vote against them. That is just too sweet a deal for them to allow to be sacfificed. As with the poor, the Dems could care less about public employees, but they DO care very much about where their political power and money comes from. Thus, civility has been left behind and Democrats have finally found somethng worth going to war for!
Follow the money, Washington reporters like to say. The money in this case comes from taxpayers, present and future, who are the source of every penny of dues paid to public employee unions, who in turn spend much of that money on politics, almost all of it for Democrats. In effect, public employee unions are a mechanism by which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party.
