.XXX

It is difficult for me to escape the conclusion that leaders of the Christian right are either dumber than I thought, or more disingenuous than I thought, after seeing them gloat about ICANN rejecting a .XXX domain.

Story here

If porn were relegated to an .XXX domain it would be dead-easy to filter out e-mail originating from it and also to steer your browser clear of it. So, if you were morally opposed to the sight of, say, hot lesbian sex, your job of diverting your attention from it would be much easier with an internet red-light district.

My apologies to anyone looking for hot lesbian sex or naughty porn that wound up here instead.

New Rules

I've heard a lot of rants against the Bush administration. I suppose this is because I seek them out. I enjoy knowing that other people, other Americans, realize that W. is a pampered prince of priviledge and an ineffective promoter of America's security, prosperity, and cohesiveness.

It helps to know that I am not isolated enough in my opinion to be considered crazy, I guess, and these days I feel down-right compatible with the public sentiment.

But...

If you can take a few vulgar words and would like to see the new benchmark for dissing Mr. Bush, then click the link below to watch Bill Maher bring it on:

Hoopie Doopie

Goodly, Godly, Gosh

Since it is impossible to disprove anything, for instance that an invisible pink unicorn is watching me type, some people believe that disbelief in God is as much a matter of faith as belief in God.

Are they correct?

Many philosophers claim that knowledge is a justified true opinion, that is, a learned opinion formed from observation and in accordance with reality.

For instance, you might believe the earth is round without being able to explain your position. That is not considered knowledge by the philosophers, since it isn't based upon any evidence. If, however, you could assert that you know the earth is round because of the round shadow it makes on the moon, or that ships disappear over the horizon, or you've seen the photos of earth viewed from space, then you would have a right to make the claim that you are knowledgeable about the earth's shape.

Since when it comes to God there is a lack of evidence either way, it seems philosophers would argue neither position can claim to be based upon knowledge.

Given this logic you can see why I feel religious leaders speak of "faith" when they are well-meaning and "belief" when they are not.

Given this logic you can see why I feel the same way about atheists that "know" God doesn't exist (or invisible pink unicorns for that matter).

You can think that God exists if you cannot know him.
You can know that God exists if you cannot think him.


All this is food for thought as I direct you to a recent article by Sam Harris, who asks readers to reconsider their strongly-held beliefs:

Tyrant of the Bible

Zbig news

Zbigniew Brzezinski has a new book out and it is called Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower.

Jon Stewart interviewed Z.B. and Zee carried himself well. Here's a link:

Big-news Brew-zinski

During the course of the interview he describes George W. Bush as having Manichean Paranoia, which is not to be confused with Neo-Manichaeism, but perhaps loosely based upon it.

Footsteps of the Fuhrer?

This article by Chris Hedges about America's militant Christians suggests they are using Hitler's methods when it comes to America's gay population:

Gott Mit Uns

When does the evil that one does overcome feelings of self-righteousness?

How strong a force is self-delusion?

Is evil a force like gravity which can be measured with mathematical precision - and can it bend light?

How does a person claiming to believe every word of the Bible believe in a phrase as ignorant of their content as "enemies of Christ"?

If all the world is but a stage where can we hire new screenwriters?

An unsettling feeling...

When the US Supreme Court delivered it's decision which installed George W. Bush as president I remember an uneasy feeling in my bones. I felt as if alarm bells were clanging but I couldn't make out where, like a fireman that lost their sight in the midst of a call.

The source of the alarm bells was soon identified as George W. Bush but I remember wondering why that should be. I didn't know anything about him and America did need a president to function properly...

And yet this feeling persisted and if anything grew stronger as the days went by. All I was sure of was that something was very, very wrong.

So, after a while of this I quieted my mind and studied my emotions. What was it that was driving these alarm bells in my mind? After all, here was a candidate adverse to foreign occupation, concerned about education, and even using the word compassion.

Then I figured out where the alarms were coming from and it is something I don't understand. What I realized is that I was alarmed because I was remembering president George W. Bush, and this remembrance was fueling my uneasiness.

That doesn't make much sense to me. This would mean that somehow I knew from past experience, or perhaps future experience, that president Bush would turn out unfavorable in my eyes (to put it mildly).

Of course you can't have this happen to you without seeing the world anew.

For instance, when I see how the world health organization is reacting to outbreaks of bird flu (H5N1) I find myself wondering if there isn't someone there with a hard-to-describe bad feeling in their bones.

The trouble is, for me, why did I have this memory and what was I supposed to do with it? After all, George W. Bush's incompetence should have been self-evident after a few months in office, let alone years, but he was reelected by tens of millions (winning the popular vote).

What chance have I got to change that kind of mass delusion?

The trouble is, lately, new alarms are sounding, clanging, and banging in my mind. Something is about to get worse, I think, but I am like a blind fireman waiting for the heat.

Do you suppose there's any point to such memories?

The Draft

In this segment for 60 minutes Andy Rooney promotes the draft:

Andy says

I know I wouldn't mind it if the Bush twins were drafted.

The Washington Post March

Editors at the Washington Post made the wrong call in the run-up to the Iraq war, taking the word of the administration over it's critics, and presenting many lies as news to the American public.

One would hope that such a series of public mistakes, which had the effect of promoting one of our nation's greatest blunders, would generate some soul-searching and some humility and some use as a teaching moment.

But, instead, they're still peddling Bush administration talking points discredited as lies in front page stories in their own publication. These lies may very well lead to further harm to our nation.

Story here

Their role is to lie and ours is to be lied to?

Is it fulfilling to work in a newsroom where the editors set a dishonest example?

Changing ideology

I have often wondered about Republicans these last few years, but never more than when hearing a hag like Ann Coulter speak.

I sez if you need a bottom feeder like that to represent your ideology then you probably ought to change your ideology.

At long last it seems that a few conservatives might be beginning to wonder if maybe Ms. Coulter isn't one of America's 1,000 points of light.

Story here

It's a start. A slow start, but a start.

Getting poorer faster

It looks like compassionate conservatism was compassion reserved for the rich.

According to Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles:

"The numbers of severely poor have increased faster than any other segment of the population."

According to Steven Woolf of Virginia:

"We're not seeing as much moderate poverty as a proportion of the population. What we're seeing is a dramatic growth of severe poverty."

You can read all about it here:

Accelerated growth of inequality

There are two disturbing facts which accompany this data:

1. A large middle class keeps a society stable.

2. As poverty rates rise the number of abortions rise.