The Role of Authenticity In Religion

It's easy for me to listen to the Alarums and Scarums of the Left and hold firmly in my heart the conviction that the Left, despite all of its best efforts, will never be able to dominate the culture of Western civilization due solely to the rather crude erzatz quality of their central, core values.

Take, for instance, the recent declaration by the President:

"Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.

"But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected."

I, for one, adhere to the belief that as humans, we are already perfect. That is, what we do is representative of our true nature and exhibits itself in all of the wonderful, silly, stupid and earnest things we do, every day. We are fallible. Of course we are. And, we always will be. I can't even begin to understand what the qualities of infallibility would be exhibited by persons that had fallen victim to perfection of the human condition. And yet when you read the words of the President, he outlines all the things that makes being human interesting; we're fallible, we make mistakes, we fall victim to pride, power and evil.

That is, the very essence of what it is that makes us human becomes the object of an increasing State. You don't have to read much of Leviathan to understand that there are some among us who are shocked, shocked I tell you, that human frailties have been observed in our nation.

I object to Leftism and the goals of the Left simply because I can see that these self-same people who will attempt to achieve the perfection of the human condition are themselves bound up by the same, severe limitations as those they would perfect. The condition of who is watching the watchers.

The goal of our Founding Fathers was to put into place a system of governance that would not simply limit the authority of a national government, but clearly stated that the role of government should not establish any form of religious belief as a state religion.

Watching the self-destruction of the latest state religion fad simply underscores the difference between robust religion and the cakey, ersatz qualities of attempted state religions. Oregon has been living under conditions of centralized control for 36 years. But simply gaining control over 36 counties and restricting those counties abilities to determine for themselves the scope and priorities for investment and development hasn't been enough for the Left. The movers and shakers of the Left in Oregon not only oppose the utilization of resources found in the state, but are actively spending hundreds of millions of dollars chasing Pixie Dust dreams in the form of Green Technology. Not to mention the millions spent teaching dependence on the State for such minimal personal responsibilities as providing for ones' own food, shelter and medicine.

So, on the one hand you have the Left, in the words of our President, seeking to perfect the human condition on one hand, while relieving from folks the need to be responsible for their own existence. You know, the things on "Maslow's Hierarchy" that us common grunts must attend to on a daily basis. The only problem for these adherents to Maslow is that self-actualization as a societal goal doesn't make any sense for a government policy.

And yet, here we are. We're fallible, we make mistakes, we fall victim to pride, power and evil. The thinking on the Left is, if we remove the impediments of fallibility, mistakes, pride power and evil, we can all achieve self-actualization.

Brilliant. Utopia in one step. That it has never occurred in history before is a feature, not a bug.

There are robust theories of redemption. And I would recommend that you check into these robust theories of redemption, if you are at all attracted to a view that your government can achieve the Utopic goals of the Left. Go down to your local Chamber of Commerce office and find a Church Directory. And visit until you find a church that appeals to you.

None of these churches receive funding from the state or federal government. Your attendance is never mandatory. You can choose to believe, or not. But one thing these "churches" have as a characteristic is their authenticity. Churches are places where people profess religious views and beliefs, and to do so is encouraged.

And finally, you may find something that no government program, no mandate can ever create.

Authentic beauty.

Amazing Poll Data

I visit Real Clear Politics on a daily basis. Say Anything less regularly, although it is one of the best political blogs on the intertubes. But it was on Say Anything that I got the amazing news.

The column I check in on the left-hand side, "President Obama Job Approval" and "Generic Congressional Vote."

Recently I posted when the President's approval rating dipped below fifty percent. The biggest drop in popularity for a President in his first year ever?

Now, the unthinkable. Republican congressional job approval tops Democrats by 8-tenths of a percent!

Small number? So? (So's your mother!!!???)

Take a look at the polling firms in the break-down. These guys aren't shills for the Republican party. Although, arguably, one could not make a similiar statement about the boys from CNN and the Democrats.

Hope? Change?

Yep.

Understanding Obama, Pt. 5

What I attempted more than a year ago, here.

How do you, with words, attempt to bring attention to a division in our society that occured thirty years ago, and now threatens the foundations of our constitutional republic? What is it the President means when he says that we are no longer going to be prisoners of the past?

In my previous posts on Understanding Obama, I've shared with you the debate between Bill Buckley and Noah Chomsky to illustrate the need of the Left to introduce equivocation into every discussion. Discussions turn into quibbles over ambiguity. Attempts at disambiguation are responded to with ad hominem attacks. "You are simply intolerant." Or, "You are simply unable to understand our side of the argument."

Why, nothing could be further from the truth. I understand your argument, and it is crap.







If you were alive when this interview took place, you might be flung back into some pretty strong sensory moments. Between the booze, the weed, the 'shrooms, LSD and peyote, somehow songs like Attica made perfect sense to an increasingly significant portion of the Elite Community.

These aren't criminals. They aren't hoodlums. They are victims of the Man. The mantra, Evil Corporations, Republicans, Profit Motive is alive today. The Left has added a new term; Denier.

The Left has its heroes today. Not modeled on an archetypical American model. No John Henry, no Davey Crockett, no Pecos Bill. These are the heroes of the Left:



Gateway Pundit asks, "Who paid the way for these thugs to get to Copenhagen?"

That's easy. We did. We're the ones paying for their public educations. We're the ones making sure their union teachers receive each and every paycheck.

We paid the way for these thugs. And we continue to pay. Just look at the Vision™ Statement of the Astoria Public School District.

"Astoria School District Vision : Students of the Astoria School District will achieve their individual potentials through academic excellence and the use of critical and creative thinking. Students will be citizens of the earth, embracing responsibility for self, family, community, and democracy."

Did you know that the Pledge of Allegiance is never uttered at Astoria High School?

Climate Stuff You Won't See Elsewhere

This is a .gif image. My understanding is, to view the .gif you need to click it. One of the limitations of blogger. Image from The Dog Ate My Data.



Point is, you may have heard about the monkey business surrounding the "settled science" of Man Made Global Warming. It is due to Evil Corporations and Republicans. Oh, and the gas that you exhale when you breathe. Polluter!


Man Made Global Warming is the greatest scientific hoax that has ever been attempted. And yet your kids are going to public schools where even today, they are ridiculed for attempting to point out all of the errors and inconsistencies in this attempted hoax. Math teachers, English teachers, Art teachers, mention skepticism about Man Made Global Warming and you receive ridicule.


And you wonder why kids fail to get excited about going to school. You don't need to be an adult to know when they're feeding you crap. But, raise a question? Receive the ridicule. Teaching. It isn't about objective truth. It's about controlling student behaviour.


Having received my check this morning from Big Oil, I am required to post the following link, found at Watts Up With That? Watts Up With That is a part of the Evil Corporate Conspiracy, too. Deniers all.


But if you read through a bit of this, something important is going to pop of the page, as it were.

Want a big check fro Big Oil (or one of the many subsidiaries of Big Oil, the numerous Evil Corporations)? Next time you run into a school teacher, ask him or her for his or her take on the melt-down of the "accepted science" of Man Made Global Warming. Just ask. Don't argue. Don't give them a look.


Just ask, "what is your take on the recent melt-down over the accepted science of Man Made Global Warming?" and shut up. You can look 'em in the eye. But don't say another word.


It's comic genius!


UPDATE: Stuff you will see elsewhere:

Chris Dudley: Republican for Governor

Chris grabbed his 5,000th rebound against the Detroit Pistons on April 16, 1999. When you're a tall guy, you're expected to play basketball.

When you play for Yale, you are not expected to play basketball professionally.

Professional basketball and politics. Have we experienced this before? Yes we have.



Kevin was an NBA three-time All Star.

So, if you want to elect star power to a governmental post, you can do so, but perhaps a little more insight into the background of the person you are electing is called for. Simply being known for play in the NBA falls far short from sufficiency when it comes to making an informed choice before you either contribute cash, or cast a vote.

I'm glad that Mr. Dudley is putting these videos on the intertubes. But, like me, you're going to end up asking a lot of questions that aren't answered here.

Here is the first video released by the Dudley campaign:



The second video released by the Dudley campaign is here:




There is a temptation to read greater meaning into the words of someone who is suggesting that the values he holds are the same values you hold.

This isn't always the case.

I remember my first conversation with Scott Bruun at the last Dorchester Conference. Scott explained that he was an excited proponent of Oregon's Pixie Dust Industry. The last thing we need in Oregon is another politician willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in order to increase Pixie Dust production.

So, you listen to the videos and listen to Mr. Dudley's words. Will he explicitly condemn Oregon's Pixie Dust Industry? Or, will he attempt to be viewed as a moderate? Instead of hundreds of millions, just fifties of millions? Is he capable of rebutting the views of the Pixie Dust lobby that money spent on Pixie Dust Production would be better spent on roads, not light-rail? What will he do with the economic development funds generated by the Oregon Lottery? More green projects for cronies of Kitz and K-goski?

Will he, instead, advocate for tax cuts to the real working class? Those who don't pick up their checks from public sector jobs?

Let's see. And don't hope too much.

We rank 47th out of the 50 states for job growth. But we're Number One for Pixie Dust.

Oh, and this is just for fun:

Bias In The Classroom

Overcoming Bias is a site that I visit every day.

Robin Hanson is an associate professor of economics at George Mason.

His interest in "overcoming bias" is congruent with the interest that I've had in attempting to model the role played in decision making of introducing objective argument in an arena dominated by prejudicial beliefs.

That is, what is the value of objective truth when that conflicts with strongly held prejudicial belief? Can an objective truth overcome the personally held value of the prejudicial belief? And do strong objective arguments have a greater probability of dominating the equation, or are weaker arguments more effective?

Here's a quote from his post today:

"Case in point: most of us attended public instead of private schools because our governments wanted to indoctrinate us into certain beliefs (and acts). And to keep control, such schools make teachers stick to textbooks."

I remember the words of one Father who said, "If we get them by five, we have them for life."

What is the greater goal of our pubic education system, providing the tools for determining objective truth, or passing on beliefs that mirror those of our publicly funded pedagogues?

Understanding Obama, Pt. 4

Craig Rucker Gives Speech in Copenhagen regarding So Called Scientists Cooking the Science


In Mr. Rucker’s Speech at the Copenhagen Conference, he states:

§ No climate treaty should be signed in Copenhagen this December!

§ To me, it seems abundantly clear that the proponents of global warming have been cooking the science to produce the results they wanted.

§ Climategate scientists have suppressed data, colluded, stifled debate, threatened scientific journals that published opposing viewpoints and placed climate propaganda ahead of climate science. We're talking about such names as James Hansen, Kevin Trenbirth, Ben Santer, Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Tom Karl, Gavin Schmidt, Keith Briffa among others. These are not a small, isolated band of insignificant scientists, as our friends at the BBC, Washington Post, Guardian and other media sources would like to assert. These are literally the founding fathers of global warming.

CFACT combines the passion of environmentalism with the practical solutions of markets and technologies to help solve many of the world’s most pressing concerns.CFACT is recognized as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization with the Internal Revenue Service. All donations are tax-deductible.

More here.



Am I wrong to think that this has nothing to do with any type of real threat that we may be facing, say vampires or pod people?

Richard Lindzen? What has he ever published?



Soros and Enron? They aren't gaming the system, are they? And it would be harsh to suggest that climate-change ideologues have gained control of the EPA. Just as it would be harsh to suggest that the enviro-whackos have gained control over our state's Department of Environmental Quality. True, but harsh. And we can't harsh the mellow.

Or is it a test? "This way to the egress!"

Pax Vobis

Sit back and listen. Relax.





And also with you.

Sciency Guy Throws Tomatoes At Palin

The obvious comparison requires no comment. But after Leftist Jeremy Olson decided that he was all brilliant and sciency and stuff, given the opportunity to make ass was simply too obvious to pass up. ("It's the voices. Listen to the voices.")



From Gateway Pundit: "A crazed liberal threw a tomato at Sarah Palin tonight at her Mall of America book signing. The tomato hit a police officer in the face instead. He was arrested."

Leftists don't understand the infield fly rule, either.

But they want to run health care.

Understanding Obama, Pt. 3

I like the comment of Chomsky at 1:50.

It's all about the community organizers. Sound familiar? Where have we heard about the importance of community organizers before? (Must be my imagination.)

Another classic Chomsky trait is his reliance upon the reliable consensus view of the Left as justification, or as supporting argumentation, for the views that he holds. See 2:55. "...just about all commentators..."

Having read Chomsky, one must be aware of this tactic. Plenty of citations, yet they are all citations of fellow travelers. Is President Obama a Communist? I don't think he's a card carrying communist. But plenty of his buds are.

As sort of a reflective moment, take a minute and consider this question; what group has been opposed to capitalism since this group's inception? The Boy Scouts? The Elks? The Communist Party?

So, why would you be surprised to find out that the fellow travelers of the Obama administration are advocates of government control of everything, in order to protect us from evil corporations and that horrible profit motive thingy? Do we need profit motive as the fundamental spark of economic activity when we could hire experts instead?

You can watch the last part of the Chomsky/Buckley debate here. More of teh crazy here.

Is It Okay To Talk About The Fraud In The Scientific Community?

"There is some irony in the fact that Vice President Gore——
one of the most scientifically literate men to sit in the White
House in this century——[is] resorting to political means to
achieve what should ultimately be resolved on a purely scientific
basis. The measure of good science is neither the politics
of the scientist nor the people with whom the scientist
associates. It is the immersion of hypotheses into the acid of
truth. That’s the hard way to do it, but it’s the only way that
works." (Ted Koppel, Nightline, February 24, 1994.)

The Libel Suit Against Dr. Lancaster(pdf.)

It is apt, well and fitting that those who have taken up the mantle of Man Made Global Warming be exposed for the partisan, fradulent hacks they are.

Because of recent awareness of the impolitic beliefs of those in the "accepted science community" this article has come to light. My attention to this article is courtesy of Rob Kremer, with whom I align my surprise that this lawsuit has never been mentioned in the "mainstream media."

Additional "must read" posts by Rob here and here.

Statement by Justin Lancaster

"The late Professor Roger Revelle was a true and voluntary coauthor
of the article entitled “What To Do About Greenhouse Warming:
Look Before You Leap,” along with Professor S. Fred Singer
and Chauncey Starr, Ph.D. The articlewas published in April 1991
in the inaugural issue of Cosmos, the journal of the Cosmos Club
of Washington, D.C.

"I retract as being unwarranted any and all statements, oral or
written, I have made which state or imply that Professor Revelle
was not a true and voluntary coauthor of the Cosmos article, or
which in any other way impugn or malign the conduct or motives
of Professor Singer with regard to the Cosmos article (including
but not limited to its drafting, editing, publication, republication,
and circulation). I agree not to make any such statements in fu-
ture. I fully and unequivocally retract and disclaim those statements
and their implications about the conduct, character, and
ethics of Professor Singer, and I apologize to Professor Singer for
the pain my conduct has caused him and for any damage that I
may have caused to his reputation. To the extent that others,
including Anthony D. Socci, Ph.D., Edward A. Frieman, Ph.D., and
Walter H. Munk, Ph.D.,18 relied on my statements to make similar
statements and insinuations, I also apologize to Professor Singer.
I also regret that I have caused Professor Singer to incur litigation
costs to resolve this matter."

"s/ Justin Lancaster
Dated April 29th, 1994."

I propose that October 3rd be known as Stewart Dimmock Day. The arguments against Man Made Global Warming have been known and indexable since the beginning of the scare.

Who are the advocates of Man Made Global Warming in your community? Well, the first group that comes to mind are the union members of the Oregon Education Association at your local elementary, middle and high schools. Oh, don't forget the union members up at Harvard on the Hill. (Did you know that these "college" guys pay dues to the union even if they wish to oppose this corrupt organization? pdf. These guys aren't professionals. They're union hacks.)

Next up? The hippies. Or, environmental guardians. Or whatever weird self-appellation they may subscribe. Gate-keepers. River Watchers. Hippies, without the common sense to know which path lay ahead for escaping a paper bag.

This is the natural constituency of the Democrat Party in Clatsop County. A party that wouldn't even let a registered Democrat elected official attend their party pow-wows. Why? 'Cause these guys are nuts and they don't want us to find out just how nutty they are. Their defense?

It's the Science, baby!

See, they gotta be smarter than you because they're all sciency and stuff. And we gotta save the world from dumb rednecks like me and you and who is that crazy woman from Alaska? We're the Anti-Science! How can anyone who believes in God believe in Science? How can anyone who believes that life begins with conception begin to understand the liberation theology of Science? How can any Capitalist not accept the care and love of the Left, and their ability to protect us from the horrors of the Corporations and the Profit Motive?

Science. Blinded by the science.

It Gets Worse (Better)

It keeps getting worse for the Left.

Just take a look here and here.

BTW--

I just found out that if you have Adobe Flash, you can scroll your mouse over the graph and get additional date info. Cool! (Gawd, I'm so old!)

So, what's the line? Flipped before the end of the year? End of January? And why can't we just all learn to get along?

Understanding Obama,Pt. 2

Learning to think critically is an inherently difficult task. It is much easier to adopt the method of the goose, to whom the world is eternally new with every blink of the eye.

Children, especially, have problems with critical thinking. There is a wealth of information on Object Constancy, and the process a human goes through to begin to understand that there is a reality that exists outside of that human's intuition. (For a brief explanation of the nature and usefulness of critical thinking, see Facione, "Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts" pdf.)

The role played by Buckkey in this, the second part of the conversation between Buckley and noted Leftist Noah Chomsky, as interlocutor is in his need to repeatedly interrupt Chomsky for Chomsky's clarification. So much of what attempts to pass as an accepted position by the Left is so clearly fallacious, the experience of listening to Chomsky as he attempts to further refine his equivocal answers in the face of Buckley's questioning is instructive as an exercise.

For Chomsky, as in Obama, the mere presence of military troops is offensive--as an act of American Imperialism. Forget about the defense of the national interest. For the Left there are no conditions under which use of force is justifiable. Unless that force is used against the citizens of their own country. Note, especially, the attempt to dichotomise between the French and the Greek experience. Even though that we can define an evil is not justification for our opposition to that evil.