Thoughts from GKChesterton on the difference:
NO two ideals could be more opposite than a Christian saint in a Gothic cathedral and a Buddhist saint in a Chinese temple. The opposition exists at every point; but perhaps the shortest statement of it is that the Buddhist saint always has his eyes shut, while the Christian saint always has them very wide open.
The Buddhist saint always has a very sleek and harmonious body, but his eyes are heavy and sealed with sleep. The medieval saint's body is wasted to its crazy bones, but his eyes are frightfully alive.
There cannot be any real community of spirit between forces that produced symbols so different as that.
Granted that both images are extravagances, are perversions of the pure creed, it must be a real divergence which could produce such opposite extravagances. The Buddhist is looking with peculiar intentness inwards. The Christian is staring with a frantic intentness outwards.
That particular passage also speaks to the "turned-around altars" brouhaha, doesn't it?
HT: VeniSancteSpiritus
Monday, July 23, 2007
First Things First--and Voting Is NOT First
The goo-goos (and the academics) who read this will have Hair On Fire syndrome for at least a month. (You've been warned, boys and girls.)
Americans are great at talking about how wonderful democracy is. The right to vote is taught as a sacrament from grade school up. Politicians can talk a mile a minute about how wonderful elections are for much the same reason salesmen at a Ford dealership can talk a blue streak about how great Fords are: It’s their livelihood. Spend your career trolling for votes and you’re apt to be able to explain why votes are the most important thing in the world.
But Americans don’t believe, not really, that voting is the most important thing in the world. For starters, if they believed such nonsense, they’d vote more.
No, Americans like exercising plenty of other rights more than their right to vote. The right to speak your mind, own property, associate with whomever you like, be compensated for the fruits of your labor: these and other rights are plainly more dear to Americans than the right to pull a lever every two or four years. Obviously, Americans would care if anyone proposed taking away their right to vote. But as a matter of common sense, voting is less important to us than those rights and liberties that make our God-given right to pursue happiness possible.
Altogether reasonable. What's "first" is generally contained in the Bill of Rights, the Declaration, and the Constitution. NOT voting is actually voting approval for the system in general; it is fallacious to state (as to the WimminVoters) that non-participation is either evil or a symptom of some 'alienation.'
HT: Random 10
Americans are great at talking about how wonderful democracy is. The right to vote is taught as a sacrament from grade school up. Politicians can talk a mile a minute about how wonderful elections are for much the same reason salesmen at a Ford dealership can talk a blue streak about how great Fords are: It’s their livelihood. Spend your career trolling for votes and you’re apt to be able to explain why votes are the most important thing in the world.
But Americans don’t believe, not really, that voting is the most important thing in the world. For starters, if they believed such nonsense, they’d vote more.
No, Americans like exercising plenty of other rights more than their right to vote. The right to speak your mind, own property, associate with whomever you like, be compensated for the fruits of your labor: these and other rights are plainly more dear to Americans than the right to pull a lever every two or four years. Obviously, Americans would care if anyone proposed taking away their right to vote. But as a matter of common sense, voting is less important to us than those rights and liberties that make our God-given right to pursue happiness possible.
Altogether reasonable. What's "first" is generally contained in the Bill of Rights, the Declaration, and the Constitution. NOT voting is actually voting approval for the system in general; it is fallacious to state (as to the WimminVoters) that non-participation is either evil or a symptom of some 'alienation.'
HT: Random 10
"Stunt" Feingold (D-alQuaeda) Lies, Flagrantly
Charlie's running Sen StuntFeingold's comments on the "John Doe" amendment.
Frankly, Feingold is lying like the proverbial rug.
The amendment does NOT allow 'anyone...who doesn't like someone....to [toss allegations around]'
Stunt Feingold should do the honorable thing and retract his lies.
Frankly, Feingold is lying like the proverbial rug.
The amendment does NOT allow 'anyone...who doesn't like someone....to [toss allegations around]'
Stunt Feingold should do the honorable thing and retract his lies.
Feingold: "It Was NOT A Stunt!!"
All I heard was that quick take from a WTMJ-radio interview.
Stunt-Man Feingold, (D-al-Quaeda) was defensive and more than a little testy with the newsman interviewing him on the radio about the US Senate's stunt-overnight "debate" on withdrawal from Iraq.
Maybe Feinie's a little concerned that the public sees him and his wacko allies for what they are: political clowns.
StuntMan Feingold.
It has a cadence to it. And more than just sarcasm.
StuntMan also voted against the "John Doe" amendment. Well, here's something to think about, Rusty:
The nation's top intelligence official yesterday went further than ever before in outlining what he described as a heightened threat of an al Qaeda attack on American soil.
"Their attempt is to cause mass casualties," said Adm. Michael McConnell, director of national intelligence, on NBC's "Meet the Press" program. "Second [priority] is political and possibly economic disruption."
..."What we see currently is primarily a focus on explosives -- explosives that can generate a large explosion, but they're put together with commercially available material," he said.
McConnell says small numbers of al Qaeda operatives are in this country raising funds. But he said he knows of no al Qaeda cells in the country that are capable of launching a strike at this time.
"I worry that there are sleeper cells in the U.S.," McConnell said. "I do not know."
In other words, StuntMan, your unhinged vote against "John Doe" elevates the risk. Even the CIA and FBI do not know whether there is a clear and present danger--although they certainly think that it exists, they cannot prove it.
UNTIL some "John Doe" steps forward, it will be a matter of some luck (or not.)
Stunt-Man Feingold, (D-al-Quaeda) was defensive and more than a little testy with the newsman interviewing him on the radio about the US Senate's stunt-overnight "debate" on withdrawal from Iraq.
Maybe Feinie's a little concerned that the public sees him and his wacko allies for what they are: political clowns.
StuntMan Feingold.
It has a cadence to it. And more than just sarcasm.
StuntMan also voted against the "John Doe" amendment. Well, here's something to think about, Rusty:
The nation's top intelligence official yesterday went further than ever before in outlining what he described as a heightened threat of an al Qaeda attack on American soil.
"Their attempt is to cause mass casualties," said Adm. Michael McConnell, director of national intelligence, on NBC's "Meet the Press" program. "Second [priority] is political and possibly economic disruption."
..."What we see currently is primarily a focus on explosives -- explosives that can generate a large explosion, but they're put together with commercially available material," he said.
McConnell says small numbers of al Qaeda operatives are in this country raising funds. But he said he knows of no al Qaeda cells in the country that are capable of launching a strike at this time.
"I worry that there are sleeper cells in the U.S.," McConnell said. "I do not know."
In other words, StuntMan, your unhinged vote against "John Doe" elevates the risk. Even the CIA and FBI do not know whether there is a clear and present danger--although they certainly think that it exists, they cannot prove it.
UNTIL some "John Doe" steps forward, it will be a matter of some luck (or not.)
The Crazies Have Taken Over in Milwaukee
In Mayor Tommy's city, where Lionel trains are objects of lust, what we really need is:
Bicycle Rentals??
Yup.
The city has applied to receive $752,000 in federal transportation funds to launch its own bicycle rental program, on a smaller scale, in 2009. The city's share of the $940,000 total price tag would be $188,000.
So people who pay the Federal tax on gasoline will be supporting Milwaukee. That's nice.
For that outlay, planners figure they could put 300 bikes at stations in the more-populated areas of Beer Town.
"More populated"?
The goal is to give people an alternative mode of transportation for short trips, and to reduce auto congestion and emissions.
"For some people, five or six blocks is too far to walk, and we do have pretty good parking availability in Milwaukee, so people drive," said Dave Schlabowske, the city's pedestrian and bicycle coordinator.
"If we have these bikes available, and these are very easy bikes to use, then the person who needs to go six blocks on their lunch hour, maybe down to the lakefront, has an alternative."
Ahhhhhhh.
Six blocks of bicycling through downtown, with your picnic-basket attached to the bike. Visions of Chagall's reveries-captured-on-canvas--
flowering trees,
birdsongs....
Lovers in the park, a jug of wine, a loaf of bread....
Really captures the imagination, until one recalls that from (roughly) October 1st through April 30th the City is subject to visits by:
Nor'easters
Blizzards
Panhandle Hooks
Canadian Clippers
and other violently unpleasant weather.
NOT TO MENTION that there's nothing so...attractive....as a good coating of salt on your suit, placed there by the spinning wheels of the bicycle as it bumps its way over the snow-and-ice formations on the City's streets.
This guy Schlablowske--has he been tested for all the usual stuff?
Bicycle Rentals??
Yup.
The city has applied to receive $752,000 in federal transportation funds to launch its own bicycle rental program, on a smaller scale, in 2009. The city's share of the $940,000 total price tag would be $188,000.
So people who pay the Federal tax on gasoline will be supporting Milwaukee. That's nice.
For that outlay, planners figure they could put 300 bikes at stations in the more-populated areas of Beer Town.
"More populated"?
The goal is to give people an alternative mode of transportation for short trips, and to reduce auto congestion and emissions.
"For some people, five or six blocks is too far to walk, and we do have pretty good parking availability in Milwaukee, so people drive," said Dave Schlabowske, the city's pedestrian and bicycle coordinator.
"If we have these bikes available, and these are very easy bikes to use, then the person who needs to go six blocks on their lunch hour, maybe down to the lakefront, has an alternative."
Ahhhhhhh.
Six blocks of bicycling through downtown, with your picnic-basket attached to the bike. Visions of Chagall's reveries-captured-on-canvas--
flowering trees,
birdsongs....
Lovers in the park, a jug of wine, a loaf of bread....
Really captures the imagination, until one recalls that from (roughly) October 1st through April 30th the City is subject to visits by:
Nor'easters
Blizzards
Panhandle Hooks
Canadian Clippers
and other violently unpleasant weather.
NOT TO MENTION that there's nothing so...attractive....as a good coating of salt on your suit, placed there by the spinning wheels of the bicycle as it bumps its way over the snow-and-ice formations on the City's streets.
This guy Schlablowske--has he been tested for all the usual stuff?
Ramos & Compean--Now Worth Watching
The Ramos/Compean case has become a cause celebre with a number of people, including both a very conservative Repulican congressman and a very liberal Democratic Senator.
In brief, Ramos and Compean were US Border Patrol agents who encountered a drug dealer. They pursued him. The drug dealer was shot by one of the agents, but escaped into Mexico.
The agents were later prosecuted by the US Attorney because they had wounded the drug dealer; and the agents were found guilty. They are now in prison.
So what's the big deal?
At least part of "the big deal" is this: while typical accounts of the incident state that Aldrete-Davila (the drug dealer) was "hit in the back" (actually, left butt-cheek) while fleeing, that's not an accurate statement.
He was hit on the left SIDE of the left butt-cheek.
Big difference. Firing into someone's back is morally unacceptable. On the other hand, firing into one's side? The morality (and the legality) now depends on the rest of the 'facts and circumstances'.
The now-imprisoned Border Patrol agents state that the drug-dealer would occasionally turn towards them, firing a weapon. The drug dealer is left-handed.
There is lots more to the story, and there are Congressional hearings going on. Now it's worth watching the events.
In brief, Ramos and Compean were US Border Patrol agents who encountered a drug dealer. They pursued him. The drug dealer was shot by one of the agents, but escaped into Mexico.
The agents were later prosecuted by the US Attorney because they had wounded the drug dealer; and the agents were found guilty. They are now in prison.
So what's the big deal?
At least part of "the big deal" is this: while typical accounts of the incident state that Aldrete-Davila (the drug dealer) was "hit in the back" (actually, left butt-cheek) while fleeing, that's not an accurate statement.
He was hit on the left SIDE of the left butt-cheek.
Big difference. Firing into someone's back is morally unacceptable. On the other hand, firing into one's side? The morality (and the legality) now depends on the rest of the 'facts and circumstances'.
The now-imprisoned Border Patrol agents state that the drug-dealer would occasionally turn towards them, firing a weapon. The drug dealer is left-handed.
There is lots more to the story, and there are Congressional hearings going on. Now it's worth watching the events.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Phone Company Rent-Seeking--on Your Dime, of Course
Would it surprise you that during the Clinton Administration a law mandating riches for "rural phone providers" was passed---AND that the single biggest beneficiary of that law is based in Little Rock, AR.?
I didn't think so.
Would it surprise you that Ted Stevens (Major PIG-Alaska) is one of the major supporters of the law, despite serious reservations from the FCC (the law's administrator) and many other members of Congress?
I didn't think so.
Read it and weep some more.
I didn't think so.
Would it surprise you that Ted Stevens (Major PIG-Alaska) is one of the major supporters of the law, despite serious reservations from the FCC (the law's administrator) and many other members of Congress?
I didn't think so.
Read it and weep some more.
Kohl & Feingold's Answer to John Doe
Herb Kohl, who now reveals that he is CAIR's Senator, (not yours,) joined the Wisconsin contribution to Moonbattery (that's Russ "No Free Speech" Feingold) and inspired the photoshoppers.
HT: Malkin
HT: Malkin
Careful, Mr. Torinus
John Torinus is on a crusade to prevent Nurse
He points out that there are other, better ways to deliver the goods while not root-and-branch tearing out the existing system. Like, for example, HSA/HRA options, combined with forcing hospitals and other providers to publish prices.
His enthusiasm, however, should not lead to blanket endorsements of such follies as 'the Massachusetts plan' which was signed into law by Mitt Romney. RomneyCare was, in the famous phrase, "a good idea at the time."
Since "the time," however, it's been nothing but trouble, and already the "cost reduction" alarm is being sounded. No surprise: the Massachusetts plan, like the Wisconsin proposal, started from a ridiculously lowball cost estimate.
Maybe the Mass. Plan is a good idea. Maybe not. But a lot more thinking should go into it.
He points out that there are other, better ways to deliver the goods while not root-and-branch tearing out the existing system. Like, for example, HSA/HRA options, combined with forcing hospitals and other providers to publish prices.
His enthusiasm, however, should not lead to blanket endorsements of such follies as 'the Massachusetts plan' which was signed into law by Mitt Romney. RomneyCare was, in the famous phrase, "a good idea at the time."
Since "the time," however, it's been nothing but trouble, and already the "cost reduction" alarm is being sounded. No surprise: the Massachusetts plan, like the Wisconsin proposal, started from a ridiculously lowball cost estimate.
Maybe the Mass. Plan is a good idea. Maybe not. But a lot more thinking should go into it.
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Great New Blog
Here's a JS blogsite which is very informative and will be a regular stop.
The author of Proof and Hearsay is also an amateur programmer--good enough that he can evade some silly State of Wisconsin CCAP rigamarole.
Hmmm!
The author of Proof and Hearsay is also an amateur programmer--good enough that he can evade some silly State of Wisconsin CCAP rigamarole.
Hmmm!
How Goes Iraq?
Not likely to be printed by AP (the Allah-Press):
---As Operation Phantom Thunder and the Baghdad Security Plan are underway, al Qaeda in Iraq has failed to launch a major attack inside Baghdad over the past week. Operation Phantom Thunder, the overarching security operation in Baghdad's Belts of eastern Anbar, northern Babil, and Diyala, continues to pressure al Qaeda's support and leadership network, and Coalition forces are maintain the pressure on the Iranian-backed Special Groups.
---Iraqi and Coalition special operations forces conducted several intelligence-driven raids inside Baghdad, and netted dozens of al Qaeda and insurgent suspects inside Baghdad over the past several days
---In northern Babil, U.S. forces captured an insurgent on its most wanted list in Jisr Diyala, along with four suspected insurgents. While not mentioned, he appears to be linked to the Iranian-backed Special Groups, "The detained 'high-value individual' is believed to be responsible for the recent increase in explosively formed projectile improvised explosive devices and indirect fire attacks against Coalition Forces east of Baghdad," Multinational Forces Iraq stated. He also was involved in an organized crime network in the region.
---Mosul and the northern areas remain contested areas as al Qaeda is attempting to reestablish its base in the region while Coalition forces pressure the organization in Baghdad and the Belts. Iraqi and Coalition forces have been pressing al Qaeda's network in Mosul.
Plenty more at the link.
Fairness Doctrine Practiced Here, When We Want To.
---As Operation Phantom Thunder and the Baghdad Security Plan are underway, al Qaeda in Iraq has failed to launch a major attack inside Baghdad over the past week. Operation Phantom Thunder, the overarching security operation in Baghdad's Belts of eastern Anbar, northern Babil, and Diyala, continues to pressure al Qaeda's support and leadership network, and Coalition forces are maintain the pressure on the Iranian-backed Special Groups.
---Iraqi and Coalition special operations forces conducted several intelligence-driven raids inside Baghdad, and netted dozens of al Qaeda and insurgent suspects inside Baghdad over the past several days
---In northern Babil, U.S. forces captured an insurgent on its most wanted list in Jisr Diyala, along with four suspected insurgents. While not mentioned, he appears to be linked to the Iranian-backed Special Groups, "The detained 'high-value individual' is believed to be responsible for the recent increase in explosively formed projectile improvised explosive devices and indirect fire attacks against Coalition Forces east of Baghdad," Multinational Forces Iraq stated. He also was involved in an organized crime network in the region.
---Mosul and the northern areas remain contested areas as al Qaeda is attempting to reestablish its base in the region while Coalition forces pressure the organization in Baghdad and the Belts. Iraqi and Coalition forces have been pressing al Qaeda's network in Mosul.
Plenty more at the link.
Fairness Doctrine Practiced Here, When We Want To.
Washington, DC, vs. "Freedom"
In what can only be an ironic note, gleaned from a column found in Taki's Top Drawer:
It is interesting to note, however, that, in my lifetime, the attempts at secession I have seen—the unsuccessful ventures of Biafra , Rhodesia , and Katanga , and the rather more victorious efforts of Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia, Macedonia, and Slovakia—were all opposed to varying degrees by Washington—a town that can’t seem to stand seeing small regions escape the grip of a central government.
It does make GWB seem a bit counter-cultural.
Whig-power, anyone?
It is interesting to note, however, that, in my lifetime, the attempts at secession I have seen—the unsuccessful ventures of Biafra , Rhodesia , and Katanga , and the rather more victorious efforts of Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia, Macedonia, and Slovakia—were all opposed to varying degrees by Washington—a town that can’t seem to stand seeing small regions escape the grip of a central government.
It does make GWB seem a bit counter-cultural.
Whig-power, anyone?
The "Fairness Doctrine" in Print Media
Thank goodness the "fairness doctrine" won't apply to print media.
Otherwise, the AP'seditorialists news reporters would have to provide PowerLine's rebuttals right in their own releases.
From the AP:
Last week, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, said the number of combat-ready Iraqi battalions able to fight independently has dropped from 10 to six in recent months despite an increase in U.S. training efforts.
Those grim assessments follow years of optimistic public statements from the Pentagon about the progress in Iraqi security forces and have fueled calls in the Democratic-controlled Congress to begin withdrawing from Iraq.
From the actual record:
GEN. PACE: Yeah, I can tell you the numbers that are in my head. Last March, I think I said there were -- I did say and there were 10 battalions that were operating independently, and I think at the time I said there were another 88 operating in the lead. Today, the numbers I saw were six battalions operating independently and another almost 100 that are operating in the lead.
And so the question becomes, okay, how do you go from 10 to six, and why those changes? And the answer is, quite simply, that as units operate in the field, they have casualties. They consume vehicles and equipment, and need to come out of the line and be resupplied, just like our own units. So the fact that a number may be changing within a very narrow band shouldn't be of over -- overly of concern.
On the other hand, we do want to see the number go into double figures and start moving more toward more Iraqi units being able to operate on their own and more units that work operating side by side with us, moving into the lead. It is a valid thing to chase, but we shouldn't put too much weight on minor variations in those numbers.
So as PowerLine says:
So the "grim assessment" did not come from General Pace. It came solely from the Associated Press, and the AP made the assessment grim by simply ignoring the explanation and the other numbers that were given by General Pace.
Fairness? We don't NEED your stinkin' Fairness!!
Otherwise, the AP's
From the AP:
Last week, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, said the number of combat-ready Iraqi battalions able to fight independently has dropped from 10 to six in recent months despite an increase in U.S. training efforts.
Those grim assessments follow years of optimistic public statements from the Pentagon about the progress in Iraqi security forces and have fueled calls in the Democratic-controlled Congress to begin withdrawing from Iraq.
From the actual record:
GEN. PACE: Yeah, I can tell you the numbers that are in my head. Last March, I think I said there were -- I did say and there were 10 battalions that were operating independently, and I think at the time I said there were another 88 operating in the lead. Today, the numbers I saw were six battalions operating independently and another almost 100 that are operating in the lead.
And so the question becomes, okay, how do you go from 10 to six, and why those changes? And the answer is, quite simply, that as units operate in the field, they have casualties. They consume vehicles and equipment, and need to come out of the line and be resupplied, just like our own units. So the fact that a number may be changing within a very narrow band shouldn't be of over -- overly of concern.
On the other hand, we do want to see the number go into double figures and start moving more toward more Iraqi units being able to operate on their own and more units that work operating side by side with us, moving into the lead. It is a valid thing to chase, but we shouldn't put too much weight on minor variations in those numbers.
So as PowerLine says:
So the "grim assessment" did not come from General Pace. It came solely from the Associated Press, and the AP made the assessment grim by simply ignoring the explanation and the other numbers that were given by General Pace.
Fairness? We don't NEED your stinkin' Fairness!!
No Runny Heavy-Lifts Nurse Robson/Rached's Plan
The way that Seth at InEffect 'splains it, you'd think that Nurse Rached Robson's plan is merely a matter of flipping a switch or two, changing the tax flow, and setting a course for Nirvana.
"'T ain't so!!" says the Eggster. Not only is the Lewin Group study horrifically flawed in its cost estimates--the Nurse Robson/Rached plan also provides that public employees STILL don't contribute an extra dime towards their insurance costs.
No wonder "lobotomy" is the common denominator in the headline here.
Introducing "CubaCareWisconsin"--with Eggster's analysis.
--The state currently spends somewhere north of $7,000 per participant; yet CubaCare Wisconsin assumes that it would pay just over $4,000 per participant.
"CubaCare" proponents maintain that a chunk of this $3,000./person difference is in the 'cost of administration' --that is, that eliminating several insurance providers (reducing admin costs to only ONE entity) will make up a lot of the difference. Then they argue that the rest will be handled by "volume discounts."
--...they [WEAC] and other public employees, and only that group can have their employer (specifically government) pay the 4% that is supposed to be the employees’ contribution without either a decrease in take-home pay or an increase in gross pay (and thus an increase in income taxes).
This accounts for the silence of WEAC on the viability of the plan. Were your average teacher to be forced to give up after-tax dollars--say 8% of their salaries--this plot would never have seen the light of day.
A double-trick-with-numbers:
--The AARP-funded study by the Lewin Group, which assumed that $15.2 billion initial cost would hold, estimated that health-care costs would go up by 6.5% annually, which is actually less than the 8% annual increase of the cost of the state employee plan. [That's Part One of the monte-game.] Meanwhile, according to the Department of Revenue, wages, and thus the increase in revenues from the taxes intended to pay for this monster, are expected to go up only by 4.6% annually. [Part Two]
So the "structural deficit" bloats even further than currently estimated (around $600-900 million, depending...)
A whole new way of 'visioning Nirvana', hey.
HT: P-Mac
"'T ain't so!!" says the Eggster. Not only is the Lewin Group study horrifically flawed in its cost estimates--the Nurse Robson/Rached plan also provides that public employees STILL don't contribute an extra dime towards their insurance costs.
No wonder "lobotomy" is the common denominator in the headline here.
Introducing "CubaCareWisconsin"--with Eggster's analysis.
--The state currently spends somewhere north of $7,000 per participant; yet CubaCare Wisconsin assumes that it would pay just over $4,000 per participant.
"CubaCare" proponents maintain that a chunk of this $3,000./person difference is in the 'cost of administration' --that is, that eliminating several insurance providers (reducing admin costs to only ONE entity) will make up a lot of the difference. Then they argue that the rest will be handled by "volume discounts."
--...they [WEAC] and other public employees, and only that group can have their employer (specifically government) pay the 4% that is supposed to be the employees’ contribution without either a decrease in take-home pay or an increase in gross pay (and thus an increase in income taxes).
This accounts for the silence of WEAC on the viability of the plan. Were your average teacher to be forced to give up after-tax dollars--say 8% of their salaries--this plot would never have seen the light of day.
A double-trick-with-numbers:
--The AARP-funded study by the Lewin Group, which assumed that $15.2 billion initial cost would hold, estimated that health-care costs would go up by 6.5% annually, which is actually less than the 8% annual increase of the cost of the state employee plan. [That's Part One of the monte-game.] Meanwhile, according to the Department of Revenue, wages, and thus the increase in revenues from the taxes intended to pay for this monster, are expected to go up only by 4.6% annually. [Part Two]
So the "structural deficit" bloats even further than currently estimated (around $600-900 million, depending...)
A whole new way of 'visioning Nirvana', hey.
HT: P-Mac
Milwaukee Voting Problems are NOT "Minor"
Mayor Tommy! Forget your Lionel set.
Fix your Election Commission--or perhaps the State will do it for you.
No, not Doyle.
Van Hollen.
Fix your Election Commission--or perhaps the State will do it for you.
No, not Doyle.
Van Hollen.
Sykes Guest to Deny Holocaust!!
As Tucker Carlson demonstrates, the "Fairness Doctrine" may cause Charlie Sykes to have some ...ah....interesting guests on his show.
They could deny the Holocaust. Or assert that 'Bushitler' masterminded the 9/11 event.
Or that Clinton actually triggered OKC.
That's fair. Yup.
They could deny the Holocaust. Or assert that 'Bushitler' masterminded the 9/11 event.
Or that Clinton actually triggered OKC.
That's fair. Yup.
Jack Murtha: Milorganite Material
Yah.
Jack Murtha's well on his way to becoming the slimiest Congressman since Adam Clayton Powell.
We all know about the "Center for Instrumented Critical Infrastructure," which does not exist, getting $1MM just because Murtha Says. When Jack "Marines Are Wanton Killers" Murtha attempts to slime his way around that minor problem, he identifies the "Center" as part of another outfit, Concurrent Technology Corporation -- a non-profit "technology innovation center" that has received millions of taxpayer dollars in recent years.
OK. So it was a 'paperwork error.' No big.
Wrong again, sucker!
Murtha, meanwhile, defended the earmark by arguing that it provides funding for a project that the Department of Energy considers high-priority. This assertion, according to DoE, is false.
Jack Murtha is a large dose of the primary ingredient of Milorganite.
He should be flushed.
Jack Murtha's well on his way to becoming the slimiest Congressman since Adam Clayton Powell.
We all know about the "Center for Instrumented Critical Infrastructure," which does not exist, getting $1MM just because Murtha Says. When Jack "Marines Are Wanton Killers" Murtha attempts to slime his way around that minor problem, he identifies the "Center" as part of another outfit, Concurrent Technology Corporation -- a non-profit "technology innovation center" that has received millions of taxpayer dollars in recent years.
OK. So it was a 'paperwork error.' No big.
Wrong again, sucker!
Murtha, meanwhile, defended the earmark by arguing that it provides funding for a project that the Department of Energy considers high-priority. This assertion, according to DoE, is false.
Jack Murtha is a large dose of the primary ingredient of Milorganite.
He should be flushed.
Friday, July 20, 2007
Some Things Never Change
A very short excerpt from a letter written by a nun to an acquaintance in Europe, about one part of her journey in America:
"Yesterday I gave a pastor a little course in philosophy and catechetics. He needed it badly. He's an Irishman who trusts more to feelings than to reason."
Hmmmmmn.
HT: Amy
"Yesterday I gave a pastor a little course in philosophy and catechetics. He needed it badly. He's an Irishman who trusts more to feelings than to reason."
Hmmmmmn.
HT: Amy
The CDF's Pronouncement About the Catholic Church
Here's a statement which is unexceptionable.
...The document declares that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church -- or, in words the Vatican would prefer to use, the only institutional form in which the Church of Christ subsists.
...No one familiar with the statements of the Roman Catholic Magisterium should be surprised by this development. This is not news in any genuine sense....
...Benedict is truly a doctrinal theologian, whereas his popular predecessor, Pope John Paul II, was more a philosopher by academic training. Those familiar with the current pope know of his frustration with the tendency of liberal Catholic theologians and laypersons to insist that the Second Vatican Council (known popularly as "Vatican II") represented a massive shift (to the left) in Catholic doctrine. Not so, insisted Cardinal Ratzinger as head of the Congregation for the Defense of the Faith. Now, as Pope, Benedict is in a position to shape his argument into a universal policy for his church. Vatican II, he insists, represented only a deepening and reapplication of unchanging Catholic doctrine.
...Evangelicals should appreciate the candor reflected in this document. There is no effort here to confuse the issues. To the contrary, the document is an obvious attempt to set the record straight. The Roman Catholic Church does not deny that Christ is working redemptively through Protestant and evangelical churches, but it does deny that these churches which deny the authority of the papacy are true churches in the most important sense. The true church, in other words, is that church identified through the recognition of the papacy. Those churches that deny or fail to recognize the papacy are "ecclesial Communities," not churches "in the proper sense."
Up to this point, I have deliberately excised some portions of the statement to mask the identity of the author. While the above could have been written by almost any Roman Catholic Bishop, it was not.
It was written by Dr. Albert Mohler—"the ninth president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary-the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention
Dr. Mohler has more to say:
The artificial and deadly dangerous game of ecumenical confusion has obscured issues of grave concern for our souls. I truly believe that Pope Benedict and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are concerned for our evangelical souls and our evangelical congregations. Pope Benedict is not playing a game. He is not asserting a claim to primacy on the playground. He, along with the Magisterium of his church, believes that Protestant churches are gravely defective and that our souls are in danger. His sacramental theology plays a large role in this concern, for he believes and teaches that a church without submission to the papacy has no guaranteed efficacy for its sacraments.
Now for what you might expect from the good Dr.:
I actually appreciate the Pope's concern. If he is right, we are endangering our souls and the souls of our church members. Of course, I am convinced that he is not right -- not right on the papacy, not right on the sacraments, not right on the priesthood, not right on the Gospel, not right on the church
You can bet that Benedict XVI is not "offended" by Dr. Mohler's last sentence above.
Contrast Dr. Mohler to the pathetic mewling from this Milwaukee "Catholic."
The real men in this three-cornered dialogue are B-16 and Dr. Mohler. The "Catholic"? Fortunately, not a player.
...The document declares that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church -- or, in words the Vatican would prefer to use, the only institutional form in which the Church of Christ subsists.
...No one familiar with the statements of the Roman Catholic Magisterium should be surprised by this development. This is not news in any genuine sense....
...Benedict is truly a doctrinal theologian, whereas his popular predecessor, Pope John Paul II, was more a philosopher by academic training. Those familiar with the current pope know of his frustration with the tendency of liberal Catholic theologians and laypersons to insist that the Second Vatican Council (known popularly as "Vatican II") represented a massive shift (to the left) in Catholic doctrine. Not so, insisted Cardinal Ratzinger as head of the Congregation for the Defense of the Faith. Now, as Pope, Benedict is in a position to shape his argument into a universal policy for his church. Vatican II, he insists, represented only a deepening and reapplication of unchanging Catholic doctrine.
...Evangelicals should appreciate the candor reflected in this document. There is no effort here to confuse the issues. To the contrary, the document is an obvious attempt to set the record straight. The Roman Catholic Church does not deny that Christ is working redemptively through Protestant and evangelical churches, but it does deny that these churches which deny the authority of the papacy are true churches in the most important sense. The true church, in other words, is that church identified through the recognition of the papacy. Those churches that deny or fail to recognize the papacy are "ecclesial Communities," not churches "in the proper sense."
Up to this point, I have deliberately excised some portions of the statement to mask the identity of the author. While the above could have been written by almost any Roman Catholic Bishop, it was not.
It was written by Dr. Albert Mohler—"the ninth president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary-the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention
Dr. Mohler has more to say:
The artificial and deadly dangerous game of ecumenical confusion has obscured issues of grave concern for our souls. I truly believe that Pope Benedict and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are concerned for our evangelical souls and our evangelical congregations. Pope Benedict is not playing a game. He is not asserting a claim to primacy on the playground. He, along with the Magisterium of his church, believes that Protestant churches are gravely defective and that our souls are in danger. His sacramental theology plays a large role in this concern, for he believes and teaches that a church without submission to the papacy has no guaranteed efficacy for its sacraments.
Now for what you might expect from the good Dr.:
I actually appreciate the Pope's concern. If he is right, we are endangering our souls and the souls of our church members. Of course, I am convinced that he is not right -- not right on the papacy, not right on the sacraments, not right on the priesthood, not right on the Gospel, not right on the church
You can bet that Benedict XVI is not "offended" by Dr. Mohler's last sentence above.
Contrast Dr. Mohler to the pathetic mewling from this Milwaukee "Catholic."
The real men in this three-cornered dialogue are B-16 and Dr. Mohler. The "Catholic"? Fortunately, not a player.
GKChesterton on Everyman and Democracy
Here we find why certain exotic things will not survive referenda.
DEMOCRACY in its human sense is not arbitrament by the majority; it is not even arbitrament by everybody. It can be more nearly defined as abitrament by anybody: I mean that it rests on that club-habit of taking a total stranger for granted, of assuming certain things to be inevitably common to yourself and him.
Only the things that anybody may be presumed to hold have the full authority of democracy. Look out of the window and notice the first man who walks by. The Liberals may have swept England with an overwhelming majority; but you would not stake a button that the man is a Liberal. The Bible may be read in all schools and respected in all law courts; but you would not bet a straw that he believes in the Bible. But you would bet your week's wages, let us say, that he believes in wearing clothes. You would bet that he believes that physical courage is a fine thing, or that parents have authority over children.
Of course, he might be the millioneth man who dees not believe these things; if it comes to that, he might be the Bearded Lady dressed up as a man. But these prodigies are quite a different thing from any mere calculation of numbers. People who hold these views are not a minority, but a monstrosity.
But of these universal dogmas that have full democratic authority the only test is this test of anybody: what you would observe before any new-coiner in a tavern -- that is the real English law. The first man you see from the window, he is the King of England.
GKChesterton, What's Wrong With the World
By my count, there is only one actual "statistic" in that passage--but his point is conclusively demonstrated, statistically.
HT: Chesterton Day by Day.
DEMOCRACY in its human sense is not arbitrament by the majority; it is not even arbitrament by everybody. It can be more nearly defined as abitrament by anybody: I mean that it rests on that club-habit of taking a total stranger for granted, of assuming certain things to be inevitably common to yourself and him.
Only the things that anybody may be presumed to hold have the full authority of democracy. Look out of the window and notice the first man who walks by. The Liberals may have swept England with an overwhelming majority; but you would not stake a button that the man is a Liberal. The Bible may be read in all schools and respected in all law courts; but you would not bet a straw that he believes in the Bible. But you would bet your week's wages, let us say, that he believes in wearing clothes. You would bet that he believes that physical courage is a fine thing, or that parents have authority over children.
Of course, he might be the millioneth man who dees not believe these things; if it comes to that, he might be the Bearded Lady dressed up as a man. But these prodigies are quite a different thing from any mere calculation of numbers. People who hold these views are not a minority, but a monstrosity.
But of these universal dogmas that have full democratic authority the only test is this test of anybody: what you would observe before any new-coiner in a tavern -- that is the real English law. The first man you see from the window, he is the King of England.
GKChesterton, What's Wrong With the World
By my count, there is only one actual "statistic" in that passage--but his point is conclusively demonstrated, statistically.
HT: Chesterton Day by Day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
