A Non-believer feels that we live live in an arbitrary and capricious universe devoid of higher meaning, justifying this view point by the fact that our universe lives by definite and incontrovertible laws. A Believer on the other hand feels that there is a higher meaning to our universe, and justifies this view point by believing that the universe is governed by an arbitrary and capricious deity that defies reason, or any kind of logical consistency.
Not sure that anything profound can be derived from this observation, but I find i an interesting study in contrasts and contradictions.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Money is NOT Free Speech!
Look at all the FauxNews followers, parroting the charlatans of the right, saying the Supreme Court's decision to overturn 100 years of campaign finance law is a victory for the First Amendment. Never mind that the Amendment is supposed to protect PEOPLE. Never mind that Big Businesses certainly AREN'T motivated by the same desires as the vast majority of Americans. Never mind that all the members of said corporations have the same right to free speech as the rest of us. Never MIND that the Repugnican party itself spent the last... 20 years? Fighting against what they call "judicial activism" but now find this ruling acceptable. here's a quote from the RNC's 2008 platform:
"Judicial activism is a grave threat to the rule of law because unaccountable federal judges are usurping democracy, ignoring the Constitution and its separation of powers, and imposing their personal opinions upon the public. This must stop."
http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/GovernmentReform.htm#9
After the story broke, Disgraced former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was immediately out shoveling the ridiculous argument that the ruling "leveled the playing field" for the middle class, because now anyone could get funding from any corporation to get elected. As if those people won't be beholden to such corporations. As if we didn't ALREADY have enough special interest money tainting our democracy.
Think of all the idiots right now trumpeting this as a way to reduce the power of special interests, when in fact, it frees them up completely.
In an opposing interview, former Common Cause President and current Democracy 21 President Fred Werthheimer pointed out:
"The Court reversed decisions from 1990, 2003, and 2007 without any changed circumstances to justify their abrupt reversals. The only change we've had is in the makeup of the court. And the Supreme Court is not supposed to issue deciisons based on who happens to be on the Supreme Court for the moment." [bold script is mine]
From the Common Cause Website:
"The Supreme Court of the United States handed down a decision today that will enhance the ability of the deepest-pocketed special interests to influence elections and the U.S. Congress, said a pair of leading national campaign finance reform organizations, Common Cause and Public Campaign. The decision in Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission, which overturned the ban on independent expenditures by corporations, paves the way for unlimited corporate and union spending in elections."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677//vp/35024513#35024513
And from teh Democracy 21 Website:
"Today's decision turns back the clock to the nineteenth century, eliminating a national policy to prevent the use of corporate wealth to corrupt government decisions - a policy that has been in existence for more than a century.
Members of Congress have passed and Presidents have signed numerous laws over the years to prevent "influence-buying" corruption of our government. These laws have consistently been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Today, five Justices issued a decision that will empower "influence-buying" corruption.
In the name of the Constitution, five Justices have substituted their pro-corporate policy views for the anti-corruption policy views of the representatives elected by citizens to establish our national policies under our constitutional system of government.
This decision will have a devastating impact on the ability of citizens to believe that their government is acting on their behalf, instead of advancing the interests of the nation's corporations at their expense. "
Fundamentally, in a government of the people- let's call it a democracy or a republic, all the people have a voice. Even the owners and stockholders of big businesses. But now, unless you have $5 or $10 to burn in every future election to make your voice heard, you won't have a voice at all.
My proposal? In the same way some feel we can "define marriage as a union between a man and a woman," so we should also "define political entity as those persons in possession of a birth certificate,
• An original U.S. birth certificate,
• An certification of birth issued by the Department of State,
• A U.S. hospital record of birth made at the time of birth,
• Institutional admission papers from a nursing home, skilled nursing care facility or other
institution
We need to get started people. It really is a serious blow to our freedoms...
Read more at:
http://www.commoncause.org
http://democracy21.org/
"Judicial activism is a grave threat to the rule of law because unaccountable federal judges are usurping democracy, ignoring the Constitution and its separation of powers, and imposing their personal opinions upon the public. This must stop."
http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/GovernmentReform.htm#9
After the story broke, Disgraced former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was immediately out shoveling the ridiculous argument that the ruling "leveled the playing field" for the middle class, because now anyone could get funding from any corporation to get elected. As if those people won't be beholden to such corporations. As if we didn't ALREADY have enough special interest money tainting our democracy.
Think of all the idiots right now trumpeting this as a way to reduce the power of special interests, when in fact, it frees them up completely.
In an opposing interview, former Common Cause President and current Democracy 21 President Fred Werthheimer pointed out:
"The Court reversed decisions from 1990, 2003, and 2007 without any changed circumstances to justify their abrupt reversals. The only change we've had is in the makeup of the court. And the Supreme Court is not supposed to issue deciisons based on who happens to be on the Supreme Court for the moment." [bold script is mine]
From the Common Cause Website:
"The Supreme Court of the United States handed down a decision today that will enhance the ability of the deepest-pocketed special interests to influence elections and the U.S. Congress, said a pair of leading national campaign finance reform organizations, Common Cause and Public Campaign. The decision in Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission, which overturned the ban on independent expenditures by corporations, paves the way for unlimited corporate and union spending in elections."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677//vp/35024513#35024513
And from teh Democracy 21 Website:
"Today's decision turns back the clock to the nineteenth century, eliminating a national policy to prevent the use of corporate wealth to corrupt government decisions - a policy that has been in existence for more than a century.
Members of Congress have passed and Presidents have signed numerous laws over the years to prevent "influence-buying" corruption of our government. These laws have consistently been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Today, five Justices issued a decision that will empower "influence-buying" corruption.
In the name of the Constitution, five Justices have substituted their pro-corporate policy views for the anti-corruption policy views of the representatives elected by citizens to establish our national policies under our constitutional system of government.
This decision will have a devastating impact on the ability of citizens to believe that their government is acting on their behalf, instead of advancing the interests of the nation's corporations at their expense. "
Fundamentally, in a government of the people- let's call it a democracy or a republic, all the people have a voice. Even the owners and stockholders of big businesses. But now, unless you have $5 or $10 to burn in every future election to make your voice heard, you won't have a voice at all.
My proposal? In the same way some feel we can "define marriage as a union between a man and a woman," so we should also "define political entity as those persons in possession of a birth certificate,
• An original U.S. birth certificate,
• An certification of birth issued by the Department of State,
• A U.S. hospital record of birth made at the time of birth,
• Institutional admission papers from a nursing home, skilled nursing care facility or other
institution
We need to get started people. It really is a serious blow to our freedoms...
Read more at:
http://www.commoncause.org
http://democracy21.org/
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
America in Decline
The last great thing this country did, the pinnacle of American Achievement, was to put a human on the moon. That happened shortly after Nixon took office, and coasting on the inertia of Kennedy's vow at the beginning of the decade. Since Nixon took office this country has lurched rightward. Since the Conservatives took control of the narrative, declaring that we are a fundamentally right wing conservative nation, the United States has been in decline. We have not even had the will to rebuild on the World Trade Center site. Reactionary conservatism has ground this nation to a halt.
Now I speak of progressive values rather then liberal ones. We were always the forward looking nation. If we didn't always live up to our ideals (see: slavery) we believed that we could sort out our problems eventurally.
Since the reactionary take over of the discourse, we are told that everything is perfect now, nothing should ever change. Things were better in the hazy past when White Males controlled the government and minorities knew their place. Both parties have embraced this, and having ideals, having a desire to make things better gets you labeled a 'Marxist' or a 'fascist' by people who haven't the foggiest idea of what either term means (see: Glenn Beck)
When the Republicans took control of congress in 1994, Democrats took that as a signal that the only way they could be elected is to "govern from the center" (i.e. take a rightward shift), and this has been the operating mentality of the party ever since.
There is a place for conservatism in governance, but they should never, ever be allowed to run things. The job of the conservative faction is to slow down progress to a manageable level (progressives do have a tendency to get carried away with enthusiasm (see: The French Revolution)), but never ever be allowed to have enough power, as they have since 1968, to control things. As we have seen, the country has ground to a halt, immobilized by inertia, allergic to new ideas, and grinding into stagnation.
Now I speak of progressive values rather then liberal ones. We were always the forward looking nation. If we didn't always live up to our ideals (see: slavery) we believed that we could sort out our problems eventurally.
Since the reactionary take over of the discourse, we are told that everything is perfect now, nothing should ever change. Things were better in the hazy past when White Males controlled the government and minorities knew their place. Both parties have embraced this, and having ideals, having a desire to make things better gets you labeled a 'Marxist' or a 'fascist' by people who haven't the foggiest idea of what either term means (see: Glenn Beck)
When the Republicans took control of congress in 1994, Democrats took that as a signal that the only way they could be elected is to "govern from the center" (i.e. take a rightward shift), and this has been the operating mentality of the party ever since.
There is a place for conservatism in governance, but they should never, ever be allowed to run things. The job of the conservative faction is to slow down progress to a manageable level (progressives do have a tendency to get carried away with enthusiasm (see: The French Revolution)), but never ever be allowed to have enough power, as they have since 1968, to control things. As we have seen, the country has ground to a halt, immobilized by inertia, allergic to new ideas, and grinding into stagnation.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
This man, he is my brother.
Al last, we have a president who understand the concept of "moral authority," and not just "might makes right."
President Obama, on the Afghanistan December 1, 2009:
Amen, my brother. Amen.
President Obama, on the Afghanistan December 1, 2009:
"And we must make it clear to every man, woman and child around the world who lives under the dark cloud of tyranny that America will speak out on behalf of their human rights and tend for the light of freedom and justice and opportunity and respect for the dignity of all peoples. That is who we are; that is the source, the moral source of America's authority.
Since the days of Franklin Roosevelt and the service and sacrifice of our grandparents and great-grandparents, our country has borne a special burden in global affairs. We have spilled American blood in many countries on multiple continents. We have spent our revenue to help others rebuild from rubble and develop their own economies. We have joined with others to develop an architecture of institutions -- from the United Nations to NATO to the World Bank -- that provide for the common security and prosperity of human beings.
We have not always been thanked for these efforts, and we have at times made mistakes. But more than any other nation, the United States of America has underwritten global security for over six decades, a time that, for all its problems, has seen walls come down, and markets open, and billions lifted from poverty, unparalleled scientific progress, and advancing frontiers of human liberty.
For unlike the great powers of old, we have not sought world domination. Our union was founded in resistance to oppression. We do not seek to occupy other nations. We will not claim another nation's resources or target other peoples because their faith or ethnicity is different from ours.
What we have fought for, what we continue to fight for is a better future for our children and grandchildren. And we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and access opportunity."
Amen, my brother. Amen.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Sarah Palin is Going Backasswards: An American Tragedy
Sarah Palin kicked off her ludicrous, disingenuous book tour taking pot shots at President Obama's economic recovery plan "Backassward." And what is her suggestion for economic recovery?
Palin says "cutting taxes and allowing our small businesses to keep more of what they're earning."
Talk about "Backasswards." Apparently Pagliacci Palin hopes ALL OF US FORGET that cities, towns, and states nationwide are already broke, and cutting services and job with chainsaws to stay barely solvent. They're closing fire houses, assistance programs, police patrols, and training.
We're in the BIGGEST RECESSION since the 1930's, after 8 years of Disgraced President Bush "cutting taxes and allowing our small businesses to keep more of what they're earning." Perhaps Pagliacci Palin needs a new punchline.
Palin says "cutting taxes and allowing our small businesses to keep more of what they're earning."
Talk about "Backasswards." Apparently Pagliacci Palin hopes ALL OF US FORGET that cities, towns, and states nationwide are already broke, and cutting services and job with chainsaws to stay barely solvent. They're closing fire houses, assistance programs, police patrols, and training.
We're in the BIGGEST RECESSION since the 1930's, after 8 years of Disgraced President Bush "cutting taxes and allowing our small businesses to keep more of what they're earning." Perhaps Pagliacci Palin needs a new punchline.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Credit where its Due.
Playing Devil's advocate for a second, one has to acknowledge that President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize would not have been possible, were it not for the atrocious policies and actions of Disgraced President Bush. Lets face it: after eight years of ignoring... well morals, ethics, and common sense, not to mention the existence of other peoples, any improvement in US Policy- such actually talking with diplomats- must be seen as a huge step forward.
Congrats, Mr. Prez. I just can't imagine what you're going to do for an encore...
Congrats, Mr. Prez. I just can't imagine what you're going to do for an encore...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)