Stones Cry Out

[Note: Cross-posted at New Covenant]

As a follow-up to my February 9th post, Science Saturday: Declaring the existence of transitional species post, I’d like to give you a lesson plan (of sorts), with the purpose of illustrating the concept of gradual, progressive engineering and design.

Read the rest of this entry

Yeah, I know, that’s a cliche line if there ever was one, but the smear by the New York Times on John McCain is only the latest, and perhaps one of the most egregious, example in this election cycle.  They endorsed him while preparing this story, and now that he has the nomination essentially sewn up, they tossed a bunch of innuendo about him from disgruntled former aides on the front page.  The blogosphere has been all over this story, but Captain Ed gives a good post-mortem on the whole thing today.

So what do we have? We have salacious but completely unsubstantiated gossip, combined with a rehash of at least one old Times smear, placed on the front page of what used to be the premiere newspaper in America. And what exactly does that do for the Times’ credibility for the rest of this electoral cycle? They can’t run anything on McCain now without it being seen in the context of what the Times itself calls a "war" between the Times and McCain. Keller and company declared war on McCain yesterday, and it fired a bazooka of effluvium as its opening salvo. They’ve marginalized themselves for the next nine months.

Ed notes earlier that the Times has done what the Republican party couldn’t; fire up the base for McCain.  Blogger punditry on the Left still wants to milk this for all what it’s worth, but it’s unlikely their words will be taken seriously when trying to prop up rumor as some sort of "I told you so" moment.  Not gonna’ happen. 

[tags]John McCain,New York Times,politics,liberal media[/tags]

5 by 5? Hmm. For those curious, the XvY notion I’m using is sort of tracking how long I’ve been doing the “Things Heard” feature here on SCO. The X is a week number, Y is the day of the week (weekdays 1-5).

• Heroism, meant somewhat ironically.
• Fun with automated translators.
• Will Islam view this suggestion as they do Danish cartoonists? Or will the ivory tower walls shield the author?
• An abortion proposal to test the honesty of the “safe, legal, and rare” claim.
• Obama, dishonest or stupid?

• Jihadist is “out”, how about “evil scum” as a replacment? That has a direct meaning and some preschool charm. I wonder, in Kantian fashion, what would happen if that term was universalized.
• Box cutter found noted at Evil Scum Watch.
• The main al-Qaeda evil scum in Iraq who lead the move to recruiting girls from mental hospitals and using them as bombs … caught.
• A Lenten litany.
• A “hope” gap? Read the concluding paragraph.

Ed Morrissey notes an exchange between Chris Matthews and Texas State Senator Kirk Watson that is rather telling in regards to Obama’s accomplishment thus far.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “You are a big Barack supporter, right, Senator?”

State Sen. Watson: “I am. Yes, I am.”

Matthews: “Well, name some of his legislative accomplishments. No, Senator, I want you to name some of Barack Obama’s legislative accomplishments tonight if you can.”

State Sen. Watson: “Well, you know, what I will talk about is more about what he is offering the American people right now.”

Matthews: “No. No. What has he accomplished, sir? You say you support him. Sir, you have to give me his accomplishments. You’ve supported him for president. You are on national television. Name his legislative accomplishments, Barack Obama, sir.”

State Sen. Watson: “Well, I’m not going to be able to name you specific items of legislative accomplishments.”

Matthews: “Can you name any? Can you name anything he’s accomplished as a Congressman?”

State Sen. Watson: “No, I’m not going to be able to do that tonight.”

Matthews: “Well, that is a problem isn’t it?”

(Video is here.)

Indeed, that is the problem. A speech with “something something something change! something something something hope!” may get ’em swooning, but it’s also the perfect way to fly in under the radar and foist on the American people policies they had no idea were coming.

And it actually says more about Obama’s supporters, since they’re more than willing to vote based on platitudes and “free” government goodies than on actual, y’know, policies. Getting more people involved in politics is one thing, and a good thing, but getting them voting without a clue of why they’re voting is not a good thing at all for the democratic process.

[tags]Barak Obama,Democrats,Kirk Watson,Ed Morrissey,democracy[/tags]

• I did a short unnoticed piece in which I wondered which historical figures our three candidates resemble, here’s one: Obama as Putin?
• Now there is an ugly phrase, “soft eugenics”.
• A suggestion for McCain’s running mate.
• A Fidel fan in the media.
• My first glance (wrong as usual) was that “terp” was a type of turtle. Citizenship for the terps? I’d vote yes.
• Bob Geldof praises Bush on Africa.

With John McCain’s victory tonight in Wisconsin, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee will undoubtedly receive a renewed barrage of questions about when he’s going to drop out of the presidential race. After all, he’s trailing McCain by almost 600 delegates. Senator McCain needs to win only about 200 of the remaining delegates in order to get to the magic number of 1,191.

I don’t think Huckabee will drop out. He’s said many times that until Senator McCain reaches the magic number he’s not going to drop out.

To quote Yogi Berra, “It ain’t over ’til it’s over.”

It’s highly unlikely that Huckabee could win enough delegates to deny McCain winning the nomination. But that doesn’t mean that he should give up, either.

In fact, Mike Huckabee strikes me as a person who finishes what he starts. Anyone who commits to losing over 100 pounds has to have a firm sense of dedication not only to achieve that goal but to continue to do the things day by day that allow him to keep the weight off.

Mike Huckabee won’t win the Republican nomination this year. But he will have shown something far greater: the strength of character to finish what he started.

So how’s that socialism working out?

The pressure on both firms may signal a tougher line by the government against foreign companies in politically sensitive industries such as food. The increasing scarcity of staples such as milk, chicken and eggs is denting Mr. Chávez’s popularity and might worsen the political climate for food companies.

In a sign of how serious the shortages have become, looters last week ransacked government food warehouses in Mr. Chávez’s hometown of Sabaneta. About 100 soldiers and police were sent to restore order, according to the Associated Press.

Empresas Polar, Venezuela’s largest food producer, responded yesterday to nationalization threats, saying it has had no role in the country’s chronic food shortages. Mr. Chávez said Sunday that Polar was "a clear example" of a company that could be nationalized if it were caught hoarding food.

Shortages have become a problem because of price controls implemented by Mr. Chávez in an effort to stem galloping inflation caused by Venezuela’s oil-fueled spending. Companies in many industries complain official prices don’t leave room for profits. Mr. Chávez accuses the companies of hoarding food.

If nationalizing industry causes shortages and inflation, fix it by nationalizing more industries.  Brilliant.  After the Soviet Union, North Korea, communist Eastern Europe, Cuba and many other examples, you’d think people would come to understand that socialism, in spite of all the flowery talk about it being "for the people", is really all about the government and its power.  (Remember that when you hear the about all the "free" goodies you’ll supposedly get from Democrats this election year.)

No human or committee of humans can ever hope to manage something as incredibly complex as a national economy.  Regulate, yes.  Nudge, yes.  Manage, no.  If a business can’t make a profit, it won’t stay in business, and won’t provide the goods or services it was providing. 

Now, Chavez ain’t no dummy.  He knows that all this bullying of corporations gives him street cred as a "man of the people", but even that sheen is beginning to dull as reality sets in. 

Tell ya’ what, though.  I’ll bet Sean Penn, Harry Belafonte and the other glitterati that visit Venezuela won’t have to stand in those lines.  Bad for Hugo’s PR machine, dontcha’ know?

[tags]Venezuela,Hugo Chavez,socialism[/tags]

The poll on whether or not you’d vote for John McCain for President had the following results:

• I’d vote for him, and typically vote Republican (71%, 12 Votes)
• I’d stay home and not vote, or not vote on the Presidential race (18%, 3 Votes)
• I’d vote for him even though I typically vote Democrat (6%, 1 Votes)
• I’d vote Democrat regardless of the Republican nominee (6%, 1 Votes)
• I’d vote against him even though I typically vote Republican (0%, 0 Votes)

Now, this is certainly a non-scientific poll, as most blog polls are, and less so since only 17 folks voted. But it does seem as though, as best as we can tell from this, that McCain’s chance of getting Republicans to vote for him seems pretty good. What I found interesting is that the “stay home” option came in second. This may mostly be due to the possibility that we get far fewer Democrats visiting than Republicans, and thus the “Democrat voting for McCain” option is underrepresented (hence non-scientific). And apparently Ann Coulter doesn’t read us, or doesn’t vote in our poll, since no Republican said they’d vote against him. Still, I wonder what the national numbers might look like.

My mantra is “I hate polls”, so it may seem to be a cognitive dissonance that we have a poll on this blog. What I’ve tried to do, however, is stick to questions of what you have done or will do or about your experience. Polls that are generally on topics outside of the typical persons area of expertise (“Is the economy in the country better or worse?”) are of little to no use (and are certainly not newsworthy, in spite of what much of the media would have you believe), whereas a question about your own experience (“Is your economic situation better?”) is worth more as a data point. Hence, we’ll still have them here, and if you have any suggestions for a new poll question, we’re happy to hear it.

• Mr Obama and church and state examined.
• Abortion, Jesus, and the modern philosopher. A really interesting twist to the debate, in denying what I’d previously called the Pontius Pilate defense of abortion.
• For your prayer list.
• One of my all time favorite musical compositions.
• On income inequality, in Bottom Billion it is noted that statistically income inequality has no correlation with outbreak of civil unrest or war.

I’m not going to note this every week or post, but the “things heard” are culled from a longer weekday/daily link list on my personal blog.

Recently, in a short exchange, the subject of national apology resurfaced, especially in the light of Australia’s move to apologize for its treatment of the aborigine population. However, on some reflection I think the idea of national apology is wrong and actually counter-productive. I was briefly looking for entertainment opportunities for my wife and I to take in in the upcoming weeks and this arose as a possibility. The remark embedded in the blurb:

This concise but wide-ranging documentary examines the subject through compelling stories from around the globe, including the families of six young men killed by the British Army in Northern Ireland, an Amish community overcoming the mass murder of five of its schoolchildren, Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel seeking an official apology from Germany for the Holocaust, … [emphasis added]

Now let me suggest two events and consider of the following which do you think would mean more to the world-wide Jewish population:

1. Angela Merkel reads an apology ratified by the Bundestag and Bundesrat offering regret for the Holocaust. A piece of modern art-work is commissioned to be executed by some marginally transgressive modernist artist.
2. In a ground-swell movement of German people individually embark on a pilgrimage to visit Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, and Auschwitz-Birkenau. Once there these pilgrims plant near or on the site a rue flower, read a poem selected by the movement, tour the site, and shed some tears. Imagine this movement sweeps over a significant percentage of the German people. Millions visit each year for decades or even for generations.

My point is to ask which of these is actually the more meaningful? A statement by a figurehead (or figureheads) or the actual feelings and demonstration of repentance by the people as individuals? I’d offer that the latter would hold far more meaning and that the former would be (should be, by comparison) almost meaningless.

Charity, when practiced by the state, tends to counter and diminish our individual impulse to charity. It is a common notion that personal participation in food kitchens, pantries, or shelters for the homeless is not required, as that is what taxes, in part, are paid to do for us. Similarly apology for evils done by the state replace or diminish the need or impulse for repentance by the individual. For the actual harm done by the state was not executed by any thing called a “state”, but by individuals. And it is individuals who must repent. Germany as Germany does not need to apologize for the Holocaust. Germans do, not Germany. Solzhenitsyn wrote that the line between good and evil is drawn through every human heart. And it is every human heart that needs to repent for things done, not those heartless state organs.

Scientists have discovered a hydrocarbon reserve larger than all of our current oil and gas reserves. Hydrocarbons, as you know, are those dregs of ancient dinosaurs and plants that we mine for energy. So then, where is this incredible field?

Oh, about 750 million miles away.

Before we get too excited here, let’s remember. There’s still an energy problem. Global warming, too. Nobody’s going to be importing oil substitutes from Titan anytime soon.

That said, data from the Cassini probe orbiting Saturn has shown that the ringed planet’s moon has “hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than all the known oil and natural gas reserves on Earth,” according to research reported in the Geophysical Research Letters. The stuff is literally falling from the sky.

Lakes are scattered across the moon, with each of several dozen holding more hydrocarbon liquid – largely in the form of methane and ethane — than all of Earth’s oil and gas reserves.

OK, so it’s technically not the “mother lode” since it’s not physically connected to the oil and gas here. And it’s technically not biological in nature, since (and we’re pretty sure about this) dinosaurs and plants have never existed on Titan.

Which begs the question: Where did it come from, and are the same processes happening here on Earth? If so, perhaps oil isn’t from dead dinos. Worth looking into.

[tags]abiotic oil,Saturn,Titan,hydrocarbons,methane,ethane,energy,space,Cassini probe[/tags]

• A roundup of comments on Rowan Williams and his comment kerfuffle regarding Sharia law.
• Contra-touchy-feely ministering.
• Defining religious freedom down.
• On the right to live or die and who has the right to make that decision?
• Three hardened reprobates, if I’m any judge. 😉

A web site hosted by my website provider was the proud recipient of a Denial of Service attack the past couple of days, and has put the blog into an unexpected hiatus. Everything’s back to normal (for now).

I understand that schools should and do determine what’s appropriate to be said during school hours, but with all the other speech and such that they do allow, this prohibition looks rather targeted.

A federal judge has rejected a claim that the Poway Unified School District violated a teenager’s First Amendment rights by pulling him out of class for wearing a T-shirt with an anti-gay slogan.

Tuesday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge John Houston reaffirmed an earlier decision in which he found the school district’s policy on hate speech lawful.

Tyler Harper sued the school in 2004 after the district said he could not wear a shirt printed with a Bible verse condemning homosexuality. His younger sister, Kelsie, was named as a plaintiff after he graduated.

Via Stop the ACLU.