Keeping the Forum Open

After a rather sad and insulting discussion on a recent post, a good friend of mine said that if this were his blog he would delete all of the comments be the offending party. The thought had crossed my mind, but only for a second.

I am a firm believer in free speech and in letting peoples words speak for themselves (and often make them look foolish). Because of this I have always allowed anonymous comments on this blog (as annoying as they can be). I have also been someone who does not approve of nor believe in using comment moderation. I know why others use it, but it still makes me skeptical. Nor do I believe in deleting comments. If someone has something to say in response to one of my posts, I encourage and welcome the thoughts and comments, even when they are laced with insults, devoid of reason, or just plain asinine.

For these reasons, I will still pledge to keep this blog an open forum for those who care to comment and engage in the conversation. I know that it won’t always be civil, but it will always be open and free.

Fat Wreck Chords is Slashing Prices

PunkNews.org is reporting that Fat Wreck Chords has announced that it is cutting the price of all of their CDs to under $10 in the USA.

Here is what label head honcho and NOFX frontman Fat Mike had to say –

This is not a sale. This is how much this CD costs, and not only that, but EVERY CD on Fat Wreck Chords will now be under $10 and most will be under $8. No, we are not crazy. We just think that having a very low CD price is a fair way for scene supporting music fans to support their favorite independent bands and labels. Sound crazy? I think it sounds reasonable. We make less profit, but bands hopefully will sell more CDs to more people, which is why we started doing this in the first place.

I think this is a great thing that Fat is doing and I hope other label follow suit. It also helps that two of my favorite bands, Swingin’ Utters and Dead To Me, are on the Fat roster, so now I shall be paying less to get their CDs.

Currently Listening

MP3 shuffle time once again…

1. “Punk Rock Teeth” by 7 Seconds (from The Music, The Message)
2. “Kung Fu Girls” by Blondie (from The Platinum Collection Disc 1)
3. “Silent Film Star” by Paul Westerberg (from Stereo)
4. “Mr. Keen” by Swingin’ Utters (from Hatest Grits: B-Sides and Bullshit)
5. “Star” by The Cult (from Pure Cult: The Singles 1984-1995)
6. “My Glass House” by Swingin’ Utters (from Swingin’ Utters)
7. “Footsteps” by Pearl Jam (from Lost Dogs: Rarities and B Sides Disc 2)
8. “Stuck On You” by The Eyeliners (from Here Comes Trouble
9. “Coolidge” by Descendents (from ALL)
10. “Myage” by Descendents (from Milo Goes to College)

New Tolkien Novel Coming in May

A Dribble of Ink is reporting that a new JRR Tolkien novel will be released this May. Fans of Middle Earth should not get too excited though…this book has nothing to do with Hobbits.

Independents Up, GOP Down

In a recent Washing Post / ABC News poll 21% of respondents identified themselves as Republican, 35% as Democrats, and 38% as Independents (of which 18% lean Democratic, 16% lean Republican, and 10% do not lean towards either).

What does tell us about the two major political parties in America? Andrew Sullivan and Chris Cillizza seem to agree that for the GOP it means that the party is getting more and more conservative. What stands out to me is that the Independents outnumber the Republicans and the Democrats. So that means which ever party is able to woo that 38% of the population, while keeping their base in line, wins.

Something else that is interesting in this poll are the responses to the question “Would you say your views on most political matters are liberal, moderate, or conservative?” 23% said that they were liberal, while 39% responded moderate, and 35% responded conservative. So looking at these numbers it is safe to say that the moderates and conservatives outnumber the liberals, but the previous point still stands…which ever side is able to garner the support of the moderates/Independents will win.

Currently the GOP is failing miserably in this regard. Part of the problem is that their image was stained by the previous administration but more than that they do not have anyone who can compete with Obama in the eloquence, public relations, or marketing departments. So for now, the masses are happy with the President because he is the better salesman (you can see this in the numbers of the poll). But how long will it last?

What I hope to see is that those self defined Independents and moderates band together and completely abandon the two major political parties and create a viable, centrist third party. There was hope of this happening last year but sadly that momentum fizzled out. I know that the changes of a viable third party are about nil, but I’m still holding out hope. Heck the GOP was once a third party so there is no reason to believe that we couldn’t have a new third party, other than the fact that the two big parties own damn near everything and everyone in politics. Either way the results of this poll do not bode well for either party IMHO.

Update: And no sooner did I click Publish on this post, I got the following alert in my email: Penn. Sen. Arlen Specter to Switch Parties.

Money Quote –

He added: "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

Profits Up…on Vinyl

The Los Angeles Times article In a digital age, vinyl albums are making a comeback chronicles the recent upturn in the sales of vinyl records. In fact, according to the article in 2008 vinyl record sales were up 89% compared to 2007 (which is probably a conservative figure considering many independent record stores do not report to SoundScan). From conversations that I have had with the nice folks at Guestroom Records, I know that a large part of their business is vinyl.

Like I said last year, this is not the first time that vinyl has made a comeback and I suspect that it will not be the last. Long live the vinyl!

Thanks to Blog of the Nation for the find.

Currently Listening

We’ve got another MP3 shuffle today.

1. “Corduroy” by Pearl Jam (from Rearviewmirror: Greatest Hits 1991-2003)
2. “Teresa” by ALL (from Problematic)
3. “Looking Back on Today” by The Ataris (from So Long Astoria)
4. “78 Rpm” by Stiff Little Fingers (from Inflammable Material)
5. “Stand Up” by Riot Squad (from Riot Squad)
6. “Love and War (11/11/46)” by Rilo Kiley (from More Adventurous)
7. “The Trees” by The Pavers (from Local 1500)
8. “Interplant Janet” by Man or Astro-Man? (from Schoolhouse Rock! Rocks)
9. “Hold Her Down” by Toad the Wet Sprocket (from Fear)
10. “Arrhythmic Palpitations” by Dead To Me (from Little Brother)

Quote of the Day

“I can’t wait to hate whatever he’s talking about.”

--CrackerEvan in response to an announcement about the new Blink 182 video. Thanks to Kevin Seconds for the find.

Gotta love the cynics sometimes.

My Thoughts on Jesus

This post over on Fear an Iarthair got me thinking about my own personal feelings on Jesus. This post over on Fried Green Onions got me thinking on this topic as well, but as of now my comments have not been approved.

This first post asked the question “Jesus: Accept or Reject?” and the second asked the question “Are Jesus Christ and His Father God the creator of the Universe?” (followed by the comment “Or did He lie when He said He was!”). There are a few different ways to look at and dissect these questions. Here are my thoughts –

“Jesus: Accept or Reject?”
For what on the surface seems to be a very basic question, the dynamics of the potential answers could be staggering. First we have to ask ourselves, exactly what are we accepting or rejecting. Is this a question as to whether or not Jesus actually existed? Probably not considering it is a well documented fact that Jesus did in fact walk the Earth. So then we have to ask if we are accepting or rejecting his teachings. Like the previous clarification, this one should be pretty universal as well. One does not have to be a Christian to understand and follow the moral and ethical teaching of the Sermon on the Mount. Finally we have to ask if we accept or reject that Jesus was divine. This is the one that is dicey because even the earliest Christians couldn’t agree on if Jesus was divine or how Jesus was divine (and many still do not agree on the latter). This also segues into our next question.

“Are Jesus Christ and His Father God the creator of the Universe?”
This is another way of asking if one believes that Jesus is divine. Are Jesus and God one in the same, or was Jesus just a man. For a couple of thousand years now, scholars and theologians have pondered and debated this very issue, yet there is still much disagreement. Even as the Church first came together, those in the east and those in the west disagreed on the nature of the Trinity, a disagreement that still hangs between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches. Then we have the statement “Or did He lie when He said He was!” This one is easier for me to answer than the other (but I’ll get to the other in a moment). All we have to go on with Jesus, as far as what he said and did is the Bible. Unfortunately the Bible can paint very different pictures of Jesus depending on which Gospel you are reading. Also there are the Gospels that were written but not included in the Biblical cannon. What do those tell us about Jesus? And did Jesus really claim to be the son of God? We know he referred to God as “father” but he could have been using the term in the general sense that God is the father of us all. We also know that the Gospels that eventually made it into the Bible, did so after a vote of bishops. We also know that the Gospels were written down nearly 70-or-so years after Jesus died. So it is not a stretch to conclude that what made it into the Bible were not the exact words of Jesus and that they could have even been manipulated or changed by those who would have had something to gain in doing so. Yes I know this sounds all conspiracy theory and all but it is a possibility, especially since none of us have a time machine to go back and see what actually happened.

So, in my opinion, was Jesus divine?

My honest answer is, probably. Let me explain. With all of my heart I believe in God. I also believe that none of the religions in the world are 100% right or wrong. They are all an expression of the divine presence. Or to put it another way, God has taken different forms for different people over the centuries, resulting in the plethora of religions throughout the world. I also believe that God has sent prophets to Earth to help right humanity when it has gone astray. There are two such prophets that I see as possibly being divine or at least being divinely inspired messiahs. Jesus is one and Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha, is the other. This is where I differ from many, if not most, other deists. Most deists do not believe in divine inspiration nor do they believe in “revealed” religions (more on deism can be found here). I believe that God has revealed him/her/itself countless times to humanity and we, humanity, have interpreted those revelations in a broad variety of ways, yet keeping the same basic moral and ethical precepts at the center of them all. So where someone like Thomas Jefferson doubted the divinity of Jesus, I tend to believe more so that he was divine but that he wasn’t the only one.

So at the end of the day, where does all of this leave me? My beliefs don’t fall in line with traditional Christian doctrines, nor do the jive with traditional deist theologies. My beliefs seem more in tune with the holistic view of the divine held by the pagans of antiquity. This holistic type of worldview has also been expressed by the Dali Lama when he said that all religions could bring salvation and that Buddhism was the one for him (sadly I cannot remember where I read or heard the quote that I am paraphrasing but I promise you that I’m not making it up). I too believe that there are many paths to salvation and enlightenment and that we must all find the one that is right for us. No matter what faith any one individual subscribes too, the teachings of Jesus are transcendent and we would all be wise to do our best to follow his example.

Quote of the Day

“...you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.”

--Obi-Wan Kenobi in Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi

Bizarre Headline of the Day

You cannot make this crap up…

Headline: Man Cut Dad’s Pacemaker Out, Cops Say

From the story –

The Delaware County sheriff's office issued a statement Sunday saying 32-year-old Jesse Fierstine struck his 63-year-old father, Charles Fierstine, on the head with a flashlight and a piece of firewood Saturday.

The sheriff's office said Jesse Fierstine then used a pocketknife to cut the pacemaker out of his father's chest.

Currently Reading

Title: A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianty and Islam
Author: Karen Armstrong
Publisher: Ballantine Books

A History of God takes a look at the concept of monotheism as known by the three Abrahamic religions and how it came to be from the early polythesitic beginnings of the Israelites in Canaan to the teachings of Jesus and Muhammed. The book also tracks the possible ways in chich God developed and changed from the Canaanite deity El to Yahweh Sabaoth, the God of Armies, and the eventual merging of the two into one.

At this point I’m only about 20-some-odd pages into the book, but Armstrong’s writing style is very enjoyable and her research is top-notch. This is a book that I will definiately be buying and using in my research on God. The History Channel produced a documentary based on the book, but it was honestly pretty boring. The subject matter was great, but the production and delivery left something to be desired.

Flaming Politics

Tomorrow Gov. Brad Henry will put an end to the recent flap over The Flaming Lips’ song “Do You Realize?” by signing an executive order declaring the song as the state’s official rock song. The song won by a large margin in a vote of the people, yet a handful of Republicans in the state House blocked the messure from becoming official.

If you haven’t been following this story, the Oklahoma Rock News Blog has a good post on the situation with plenty of links to follow.

Currently Listening – Favorites Edition

Today we’re doing songs from 10 of my favorite bands.

1. “Mango” by Dag Nasty (from Four on the Floor)
2. “Left of the Dial” by The Replacements (from Tim [Expanded Edition])
3. “Moment of Surrender” by U2 (from No Line on the Horizon)
4. “Revolution” by Hudson Falcons (from Desperation & Revolution)
5. “Tangerine” by Buffalo Tom (from Sleepy Eyed)
6. “Pep Talk” by Descendents (from ALL)
7. “Living is the Best Revenge” by R.E.M. (from Accelerate)
8. “Time to Go” by Dropkick Murphys (from Blackout)
9. “Dead Generation” by Roustabouts (from The Only One)
10. “Glad” by Swingin’ Utters (from Dead Flowers, Bottles, Bluegrass, and Bones)

A Xena Movie?

I wish, but according to the show’s co-creator Rob Tapert a Xenia movies is “something that just won’t happen.” This really isn’t that surprising considering Xena died in the series finale, but crazier things have happened.

Thanks, again, to Pop Candy for the find.

Another Book for the Library

Wish You Were Here: An Essential Guide to Your Favorite Music Scenes—from Punk to Indie and Everything in Between by Leslie Simon

Thanks to Pop Candy for the find.

Best Album Openers and Closers of the 90’s

Here are the 10 best album openers and closers of the 1990’s according to Pop Tarts Suck Toasted.

Thanks to Pop Candy for the find.

Video of the Day

"Special Professional" by Dead To Me

Currently Listening

We’re doing the MP3 shuffle again today.

1. “Life on the Road” by ALL (from Mass Nerder)
2. “The Old Songs” by One Man Army (from Last Word Spoken)
3. “Punk Rock Planet” by The Eyeliners (from Here Comes Trouble)
4. “Angel’s Wings” by Social Distortion (from Sex, Love and Rock ‘n’ Roll)
5. “I Hate My Generation” by The Dimestore Haloes (from Thrill City Crime Control)
6. “The Big Guns” by Jenny Lewis with The Watson Twins (from Rabbit Fur Coat)
7. “Dirty Denim” by The Donnas (from Spend the Night)
8. “The Only One I Know” by The Charlatans UK (from Some Friendly)
9. “Sign It Away” by Swingin’ Utters (from A Juvenile Product of the Working Class)
10. “Tangerine” by Buffalo Tom (from Sleepy Eyed)

More on America as a Christian Nation

On Faith’s Brian D. McLaren has written an excellent piece entitled A “Christian” Nation Wouldn’t Act This Way. I’m going to quote a few paragraphs (I’m not big on just copying and pasting someone else’s entire article/post), but I highly suggest reading the entire thing. It is not very long and well worth the click.

Thanks to Mainstream Baptist for the find.

Money Quotes –

The United States is not a theocracy. It is a democratic republic that upholds as its unofficial motto "e pluribus unum." The "pluribus" not only refers to many states, races, regions, or political views, but also to many religions.

[…]

Yes, our founding fathers (and mothers), even those who were Deists and not traditional Christians, drew deeply from their European-Christian history and heritage. Yes, our nation, like every nation has much to be proud of in our heritage, and I'm sure there are elements of Christian virtue to be found in nearly every neighborhood from coast to coast. But no, it would be inaccurate to look at American history and say it consistently and accurately has reflected the ethic of Jesus or even the highest ideals of the Christian religion. I don't say this to downgrade America, but rather to uphold my belief that the label "Christian" means more than we have understood it to mean ... and that in its best sense, a humble, Christian ethic upholds the motto "e pluribus unum" by respecting all people of all religions as neighbors and as equal bearers of the image and love of God.

In fact, I would say that the more we claim America is a Christian nation, the less we uphold the highest ideals of both authentic Christian faith and authentic American democracy.

For those who think that by posting this I am either somehow anti-Christian or ignorant of American history, I can promise you that I am neither. There is honesty and truth in McLaren’s words whether or not people want to admit it. Like my good friend Steve at The Otter Limits recently addressed, there is much in this country to love but if you are going to love it you must see the good with the bad (also see the Descendents’ song “’Merican” – video; lyrics). Some of that is admitting and recognizing the atrocities that we as a nation have been guilty of and for some it is recognizing that this nation was built as much on the Enlightenment as it was on Judea-Christian values. This is not a bad thing and in fact it is something that makes us strong.

I have to admit that I'm not sure where that last part came from, because that was not part of my original idea for this post, but I just kind of go with the flow when I writing.

Who Owns What?

This is an interesting and disturbing look at just how few people own the media organizations and outlets in this country.

Thanks to zTruth for the find.

Video of the Day

"Proud Mary" by Ike & Tina Turner

I Can’t Wait for This Book!!!

MEG: Hell’s Aquarium

I’m trying a new layout…

I’ve been using the same layout since I started blogging so I thought it was time for a change (plus I saw how cool the new layout on The Otter Limits looks). I’m not sure what I think about this one though… What do you think?

Obama’s Not Making Them Happy

According to the two graphs Andrew Sullivan posted yesterday, the President’s approval rating with Independents and Republicans is dropping. In the case of the Independents he is still ahead, 56.5% approve vs. 33.7% disapprove, but if I am reading these graphs correctly, the disapprove number is the one that is currently making headway. This does not bode well for the administration if the Independents who disapprove of the President’s performance continue to rise.

Currently Listening – Best of the Decade Edition

I’ve been tossing around this idea for a post on the best albums of the decade so far, but haven’t gotten past making a stack of CDs of the potential albums. Today’s Currently Listening are songs from those albums that I think are the best to come out since 2000.

1. “Something New” by Dead To Me (from Cuban Ballerina)
2. “Rise Up with Fists” by Jenny Lewis with The Watson Twins (from Rabbit Fur Coat)
3. “Heart Is Gone” by Roustabouts (from The Only One)
4. “My Glass House” by Swingin’ Utters (from Swingin’ Utters)
5. “Ladies’ Choice” by Zac Efron (from Hairspray [2007 Soundtrack])
6. “Better Than That” by ALL (from Problematic)
7. “Wicked Sensitive Crew” by Dropkick Murphys (from The Warrior’s Code)
8. “Tack” by Descendents (from Cool To Be You)
9. “The Long Goodbye” by The GC5 (from Never Bet the Devil Your Head)
10. “Six Degrees of Separation” by The Methadones (from This Won’t Hurt)
11. “From Within” by The Staggers (from One Heartbeat Away from Hell)

Ready for a Solar Butt Whippin’?

The pictures alone make this story worth checking out.

8 Handshakes that Changed the World

Here is an interesting story that talks about some of the most important handshakes in modern history. The story was apparently prompted by all of the reactions to the slightly creepy picture of Obama and Chavez shaking hands and, what looks like, cackling like school girls.

Jackass of the Day

That would be me.

I made some erroneous assumptions about local blogger zTruth that were invalid. I apologize for what I said and stand corrected. zTruth I hope that you accept my sincere apology. I am far from perfect and more than willing to admit when I’m wrong and in this case I was very wrong. This is just another great reminder of what happens when we assume things…it makes an ass out of you and me and I sure was made an ass of in this case.

Currently Listening

Today is another MP3 shuffle day…

1. “Might” by Archers of Loaf (from Icky Mettle)
2. “Sad Girl” by The Lemonheads (from Lick)
3. “American Nightmare” by Tiger Army (from The Early Years)
4. “Here We Are Nowhere” by Kings of Nuthin’ (from Over the Counter Culture)
5. “Never See Me Again” by Vivian Girls (from Vivian Girls)
6. “Orange Blossom Special” by Johnny Cash (from The Essential Johnny Cash Disc 1)
7. “Open Letter (To a Landlord)” by Living Colour (from Super Hits)
8. “Break on Through (To the Other Side)” by The Doors (from The Doors)
9. “Spin the Bottle” by The Juliana Hatfield Three (from Become What You Are)
10. “Ambulance” by Hagfish (from Buick Men)

One God

I’ve decided to undertake what will probably become a lengthy project (if I don’t give up and lose interest first). I’m going to do research into the history of God including some of the various names given to God (Elohim, Yahweh, Allah, etc.) and the origins of monotheism (starting with the failed attempt by one Egyptian pharaoh going then to Zoroastrianism and its influence on the Israelites exiled in Babylon). I am hoping that this ends up in the form of a research paper that includes many sources from books to documentaries to the internet. If anyone has any suggestions for material to help in my research, I would greatly appreciate them. I will also periodically provide update on my progress, including Currently Reading and Currently Watching segments showing some of my sources. Hopefully I won’t burn out on this project because I think that it will be fun and this is a subject and topic that I find fascinating.

Happy Earth Day

It was 19 years ago today (give or take a few days) that I became an environmentalist. I believed, and still believe, that protecting our planet and her resources is of the utmost importance to the survival of humanity. I also believed, and still believe, that we are part of something bigger than ourselves and it is our duty to protect the land, sky, and sea for every living thing on Earth and that even though we are stronger and “more advanced” than other creatures inhabiting the planet we are not their masters nor are we the superior race.

Since that time I have been a major proponent for recycling (much to the annoyance of my parents when I still lived at home) and today we recycle more at our house than we throw away. I also am a believer in the protection of our rain forests and the reduction, if not completely ending, pollution. These are positions that I think are sensible and full of common sense. If we keep pumping filth into the air we will be unable to breath. If we keep dumping our waste into the oceans then all of the fish will die out. If we cut down the rain forests, we eventually run out of oxygen to breathe. It is pretty hard to argue against those things.

Unfortunately much of the environmental community has locked on to the controversial idea of global warming and climate change. They have latched on to science that may or may not be accurate and has been repeatedly refuted by reputable scientists over the years. Yet they still hold on to this idea that man is permanently changing the climate of Earth with our factories and cars. This may be the case, but honestly I’m not convinced. It seems to me that we do not know enough about the long term climate cycles of our planet to make assumptions that the changes that we are seeing are some how a result of the actions of humanity.

That having been said, the factories and cars that these environmentalists are protesting against are polluting our environment and everything that can be done to cut back said pollution should be done. The problem that most environmentalists, or at least those who are the vocal lobbying groups, run into is that have decided to make global warming their battle cry instead of fight pollution, deforestation, and the extinction of various species due to the actions of humanity. These are tangible things that we can all identify with (we have all seen the litter on the streets for example). But instead they have gone for this intangible possibility. To me that is the wrong way to fight this battle.

I truly believe that if the environmental community would back off the global warming angle and instead promote recycling and anti-pollution measures and campaigns then much of the criticism lobbied at them would become null and void. And the end result would be the same…a cleaner Earth.

So on this Earth Day I’d like to ask everyone to really think about what is important about our beautiful planet and what we can do to keep her safe and clean without all of the nonsense that has divided so many.

Pixies Albums Reissued in a Box Set

PunkNews.org is reporting that the Pixies will be releasing a box set entitled Minotaur that will include all five of their albums. There will also be Deluxe and Limited Editions available.

Currently Listening

I’m back in the library today with my MP3 player. Here’s what it offered up.

1. “Excuse” by ALL (from Breaking Things)
2. “(I’m Always Touched by Your) Presence, Dear” by Blondie (from The Platinum Collection Disc 1)
3. “King of Birds” by R.E.M. (from And I Feel Fine…: The Best of the I.R.S. Years 1982-1987 Disc 2)
4. “The Blue Lamp” by Swingin’ Utters (from Hatest Grits: B-Sides and Bullshit)
5. “Casemaker” by Sinkhole (from Punk USA)
6. “Police Blitz” by The Donnas (Turn 21)
7. “Sweet Jane” by Cowboy Junkies (from The Trinity Session)
8. “Die Young Stay Pretty” by Blondie (from The Platinum Collection Disc 2)
9. “Do the Devil” by The Amazing Royal Crowns (from The Amazing Royal Crowns)
10. “Diane” by Material Issue (from 20th Century Masters – The Millennium Collection: The Best of Material Issue)

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a 4x10 with Dead To Me, The Smiths, The Briefs, and Cheap Trick.

1. “Stiff Competition” by Cheap Trick (from Heaven Tonight)
2. “I Know It’s Over” by The Smiths (from The Queen is Dead)
3. “Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace” by Cheap Trick (from Cheap Trick)
4. “How Soon Is Now?” by The Smiths (from Singles)
5. “Shoplifters of the World Unite” by The Smiths (from Singles)
6. “Cause of My Anger” by Dead To Me (from Cuban Ballerina)
7. “I Want You to Want Me” by Cheap Trick (from Cheap Trick)
8. “Still Heartbeat” by Dead To Me (from Cuban Ballerina)
9. “I Can’t Work” by The Briefs (from Steal Yer Heart)
10. “Stuck on You” by The Briefs (from Steal Yer Heart)

Cleopatra’s Tomb

Archaeologists in Egypt think that they may have found the tomb of Cleopatra and Mark Antony.

Money Quote –

"The discovery of the cemetery this week really convinced me that there is someone important buried inside this temple," he told television cameras while standing inside a rough cut tomb surrounded by niches filled with bones and whole skeletons.

"No one would be buried outside a temple without a reason. We saw that in the pharaonic days, they were always buried beside pyramids," he said.

Wouldn’t it be something if this turned out to be the place where Cleopatra and Mark Antony were buried? Man I love this stuff!!!

The Future of Investigative Journalism

Tracy Van Slyke has an excellent piece in the Guardian on the future of investigative journalism and the proposal for a national endowment for investigative journalism.

Money Quote –

A national endowment for journalism is a great idea deserving of support. However, a programme that doles out funds based on popularity and audience size will ultimately fail in its public duty. Instead we must turn to a vibrant and diverse group of journalism producers, big and small, to fulfil journalism's essential role as the fourth estate.

That's what democracy is all about.

I think that Van Slyke has hit the nail on the head with this one.

How Free is Free Speech?

Recently the actress/comedian Janeane Garofalo has gotten into hot water over her comments about the people who took party in the Tea Party protests on April 15th. I have admittedly not heard the interview in question but I am somewhat familiar with her stances on politics. She is a very proud and outspoken progressive liberal and I applaud her for expressing her views but condemn her methods when all they do nothing more than spread hate and contempt for those she disagrees with.

This situation has one local blogger so upset that he is calling on people to contact New Corporation (who Garofalo works for as a cast member of the series 24) and tell them that they are not happy with Garofalo expressing her opinions. In his post, zTruth states “Tell News Corporation and Fox Broadcasting Company your concern about the hate expressed by one of their employees on national TV. Be polite, of course.” The irony here is that much of what this blogger posts is hateful and could be viewed as bigoted (especially when it comes to Muslims), yet as soon as someone of the other political persuasion gives back the same type of garbage that he and people like Michael Savage spew on a daily basis, he is up in arms and ready to protest this person’s employer.

So this begs the question…how free is free speech? It seems to me that many conservatives are quite comfortable with the shenanigans of polemics like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh but as soon as someone like Garofalo or Keith Olberman expresses themselves in the same fashion, it is a disgrace and those individuals should be fired and shunned. Let me be absolutely clear about something here. The behavior of people like Coulter, Olberman, Limbaugh, and Garofalo sickens me when they go on their inane tirades that only amount to blaming all of the problems of the world on those they disagree with. I applaud these people for expressing their opinions but want to kick them for their horrible behavior. People on both the left and right are ridiculously guilty of condemning people when they say outrageous things that they disagree with while supporting those who say equally ridiculous things that they agree with. This is complete and total hypocrisy.

Overall Garofalo is someone that I do look up to and admire. She has tried to take on the Hollywood establishment and made some great films and done some hilarious stand up. That having been said I do not agree with everything that she says and I condemn hateful generalizations that do nothing more that incite a reaction.

One of the greatest things about America is our freedoms and liberty and freedom of speech is something that we must all cherish and protect. That does not mean that we should put up with bad and idiotic behavior, but we must do all that we can to protect this freedom. I think this was summed up best by Michael Douglas playing President Andrew Shepherd in The American President –

America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free".

Currently Listening – Falcons Edition

The Hudson Falcons played at The Conservatory this past Saturday and unfortunately I missed the show. So in honor of New Jersey’s working class warriors today we’re doing 10 of my favorite Falcons’ tunes.

1. “Working Class War” (from Desperation & Revolution)
2. “Different Breed” (from Those Whose Hearts and Souls Are True)
3. “Drinkin’ with the Band” (from Singles Collection 1997-2002)
4. “Monahan’s” (from Desperation & Revolution)
5. “Jersey City Streets” (from La Famiglia)
6. “Stay with Me” (from Those Whose Hearts and Souls Are True)
7. “Free Lori” (from Desperation & Revolution)
8. “Disciples of Soul” (from Those Whose Hearts and Souls Are True)
9. “Latin Knights” (from La Famiglia)
10. “Open All Night” (from Those Whose Hearts and Souls Are True)

News of The Hobbit Films

According to A Dribble of Ink the film adaptation of JRR Tolkien’s The Hobbit is going to be broken down into two films. The projected is being headed by Peter Jackson and Guillermo Del Toro.

I am really looking forward to seeing these movies. Now if we could only get the Shannara movie going…

Will Liberty Replace Christianity in America?

The blog Classically Liberal has written a very thought provoking post in Will liberty replace Christianity in post-Christian America?

Money Quote –

It doesn’t mean there is no Christian presence, or that Christians are hidden away. It merely means that Christianity, or any religion for that matter, is not the motivating force in the public arena. It is total separation of church and state. Public policy debates will take place primarily in the realm of reason, resting on evidence, not promoted because of the theological opinions of some televangelist. Newsweek offered some evidence of the post-Christian trend. In 1994, 64 percent of Americans said that “faith” could help answer the nation’s problems. In the most recent poll they found that this was down to 48 percent. In 1957, 82 percent said religion answered problems.

The following is a quote that CLS included from an article by Newsweek that he linked in his post that I think is also very telling (I added the bold type) –

If we apply an Augustinian test of nationhood to ourselves, we find that liberty, not religion, is what holds us together. In "The City of God," Augustine —converted sinner and bishop of Hippo—said that a nation should be defined as "a multitude of rational beings in common agreement as to the objects of their love." What we value most highly—what we collectively love most—is thus the central test of the social contract.

Judging from the broad shape of American life in the first decade of the 21st century, we value individual freedom and free (or largely free) enterprise, and tend to lean toward libertarianism on issues of personal morality. The foundational documents are the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, not the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament (though there are undeniable connections between them). This way of life is far different from what many overtly conservative Christians would like. But that is the power of the republican system engineered by James Madison at the end of the 18th century: that America would survive in direct relation to its ability to check extremism and preserve maximum personal liberty. Religious believers should welcome this; freedom for one sect means freedom for all sects.

I hope and pray that we as a nation do embrace liberty in these uncertain times.

Talking Books, Politics, and Freedom

Dave the Oklahomilist has written a thoughtful piece dealing with the Constitution, Atlas Shrugged, and freedom. While he and I often disagree on many issues at hand, this was a well done post that deserves to be recognized as such. Good work Dave.

Building a Triangle with Two Sides?

According to Man of the West in response to a comment I posted on his piece Doug Giles Notes the Obvious, I am “trying to build a triangle with only two sides.” The original piece referenced a column by Giles dealing with President Obama’s statement that America is not a Christian nation. The gist of my comment was that America is a secular nation that was built on both Judea-Christian and Enlightenment ideas, ideals, and values. Mr. West went of to say the following, “You'll have to be more familiar with presuppositionalism before you can fully address this one. In my opinion, anyway.”

So I had to ask…what is presuppositionalism? A quick Google search brought me to the Wikipedia entry on presuppositionalism and a page titled What is presuppositionalism?.

Here are the opening paragraphs from the Wikipedia entry –

Presuppositional apologetics is a school of Christian apologetics, a field of Christian theology that aims to (1) present a rational basis for the Christian faith, (2) defend the faith against objections, and (3) expose the perceived flaws of other worldviews.[1] Presuppositional apologetics is especially concerned with the third aspect of this discipline, though it generally sees the trifold distinction as a difference in emphasis rather than as delineating three separate endeavors. Presuppositional apologetics as developed and is most commonly advocated within Reformed circles of Christianity.[2]

The key feature of this school is that it maintains the Christian apologist must hold the supernatural revelation contained in the Bible as its preeminent standard of thought. According to its advocates, apart from such presuppositions (see also presupposition (philosophy)), one could not make sense of any human experience, and there could be no apologetics, because there can be no set of neutral assumptions from which to reason with a non-Christian.[3] In other words, presuppositionalists claim that a Christian cannot consistently declare his belief in the necessary existence of the God of the Bible and simultaneously argue on the basis of a different set of assumptions in which God may or may not exist, and Biblical revelation may or may not be true.

Presuppositionalists compare their presupposition against other ultimate standards such as reason, empirical experience, and subjective feeling. They do not use the prefix pre- ("before") to imply priority in time (that is, something that must be supposed in advance), not least because one cannot receive biblical revelation without using sense experience to read or hear it, reason to understand it, and emotion to be affected by it; rather, a presupposition in this context is something that comes "before" and has priority as the ultimate standard of right and wrong.[4]

Here are the first few paragraphs from “What is presuppositionalism?” --

Presuppositionalism is the system of Christian apologetics attributed to Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987). Van Til was Professor of Apologetics at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from its founding in 1929 until his retirement in 1975. Van Til, J. Gresham Machen and others, resigned from Princeton Seminary and founded Westminster after the former seminary took a decidedly liberal turn.

"... Van Til's distinctive approach is 'presuppositionalism', which may be defined as insistence on an ultimate category of thought or a conceptual framework which one must assume in order to make a sensible interpretation of reality: 'The issue between believers and non-believers in Christian theism cannot be settled by a direct appeal to "facts" or "laws" whose nature and significance is already agreed upon by both parties to the debate. The question is rather as to what is the final reference-point required to make the "facts" and the "laws" intelligible. The question is as to what the "facts" and "laws" really are. Are they what the non-Christian methodology assumes they are? Are they what the Christian theistic methodology presupposes they are?' (Defense of the Faith, Philadelphia, 1967).

"Not only to 'prove' biblical Christianity but to make sense of any fact in the world Van Til holds that one must presuppose the reality of the 'self-contained' triune God and the self-attesting revelation of the Scriptures. From this basis, the redeemed person then reasons 'analogically',' attempting 'to think God's thoughts after him'. This means humans may know reality truly (for God, in whose image they are created, knows it truly), but not exhaustively (for God is infinite and they are finite).

"The presuppositionalist endeavors to convince the unregenerate first by demonstrating that, on unregenerate presuppositions of chance occurrence in an impersonal universe, one cannot account for any sort of order and rationality. Next, he tries to show that life and reality make sense only on the basis of Christian presuppositions.

The first thing that jumps out at me is the almost arrogance of this philosophy as expressed in item # 3 in the first paragraph and the entire second paragraph of the Wiki entry and in the second paragraph of the “What is presuppositionalism?” entry. If I am reading these pages correctly, the philosophy of presuppositionalism believes in the total supremacy of the Christian religion and sees the Bible as the end-all and be-all text and source in the world. Now to be completely fair this is my first exposure to presuppositionalism so I am very green on the subject. That having been said, I am a bit taken aback by the lack of humility expressed in this philosophy, at least on the surface.

To me, any philosophy or religion that claims total supremacy over all others smacks of arrogance, intolerance, and a complete and total lack of humility. It is one thing to believe what you believe, but it is another thing to lack the humility to understand that you could be wrong. I tackled this issue back in 2006 with the posts Faith vs. Intellect and More on Religion. Here is a section of the Faith vs. Intellect piece that I think fits this discussion perfectly –

There are times when a person’s intellect is controlled and/or overridden by his/her faith and vice versa. Here are a couple of examples:

A) A person of faith who is unable to accept the intellectual possibility that God does not exists and/or that his/her faith/religion could be “wrong”.
B) A person without faith who is unable to accept the possibility that God may exist.

Both are stead fast in their beliefs and both are incorrect. The fact is you cannot prove or disprove matters of faith. If you could, they wouldn’t be matters of faith, but there are times and people who cannot separate their faith from their intellect and that concerns me.

By definition faith is “belief that is not based on proof” and intellect is “the power or faculty of the mind by which one knows or understands, as distinguished from that by which one feels and that by which one wills; the understanding; the faculty of thinking and acquiring knowledge”. As one can see these are very different functions of the human brain but still there are individuals who let their faith be controlled by their intellect and their intellect controlled by their faith.

The way I see it, a person should have the mental capacity to step outside of his/her faith to look at something from a completely intellectual point of view. Subsequently a person should also have the mental capability of stepping outside of his/her intellect to look at something from a faith based point of view. I am by no means suggesting that people not hold true to his/her beliefs, but I am suggesting that people look outside of their beliefs to see situations from ever possible angle. If a person is unable to do this, then maybe their faith and/or intellect were not that strong to begin with.

In the case of those who believe in presuppositionalism, they seem to not only be unable to separate their faith from their intellect but completely make one dependent on the other. That to me is unhealthy, but them again I see blind devotion to anything, be it religion, philosophy, or political party, as completely unhealthy.

Obviously there has got to be more to presuppositionalism than the little I have found, so my research will continue. But even with this limited knowledge I do not see how I was trying to “build a triangle with only two sides.” I had asked Mr. West for some further explanation and look forward to his response (and to his thoughts on this post). I’d like to get input from some others out there on this subject as well. What do you think?

Sunny Day Real Estate Rumored to Reunite & Tour

PunkNews.org is reporting that Seattle, WA’s Sunny Day Real Estate has reunited and is planning on touring with the original line-up. The bass player and drummer of SDRE both went on to play in the Foo Fighters, but the drummer later left to return to SDRE prior to the band breaking up.

Sunny Day Real Estate is one of the great emo bands and their debut album Diary is fantastic. You can see the videos for their songs “Seven” and “In Circles” here and here.

Today is Record Store Day

Go and support your local independent record stores!! You can get more info on Record Store Day here.

For those in the metro OKC area, I highly suggest going to both Size Records and Guestroom Records to find great music and some great folks behind the counters!

Quote of the Day

The truth is more powerful than lies. Logic is more powerful than illogic. Love is more powerful than hate.

--The Other Dave from the comment section of the post Labels on The Otter Limits

Apparently I’m an Idiot

Thanks to Steve at The Otter Limits for pointing this out to me and for the kind words of support.

Here’s the situation. Recently I wrote a post entitled Let’s Talk Meaning… in which I commented on some posts from the blog Fear an Iarthair dealing with the meaning of the terms liberal and conservative. While I disagreed with things that Man of the West wrote in his posts, I respectfully asked questions and he responded in a courteous and respectful manner.

A couple of days later Jim at Fried Green Onions responded with a post entitled Bloggers searching for the meaning of the word liberal: 2009 definition would be “idiot who voted for anti-American Democrat candidate Obama”. The post started with a link to my aforementioned post and then included the following diatribe –

Idiot liberals are lemmings who cascade over the cliffs of untried wild ideas when all around them they can see that the American way has made us the most prosperous nation ever to exist on Planet Earth. They support quality of life improvement by killing unwanted pre born and antique citizens. They are so soft on defence of the nation that it is a constant fight to fund our protective services.
Blinded by ideology they utterly can not see the forest for the thorny trees they planted.

When Steve called Jim out for basically being an a-hole, Jim responded with sarcasm closing with “BTW...I like your blog. I like Oklahoma Lefty a lot to. Pray for me.” There are many different ways that this could be interpreted: 1) that because he likes our blogs (Steve’s and mine) that he is somehow affronting God and thus needs the prayers to help him in the afterlife, 2) that he actually does like us and now feels bad for being a prick, or 3) he is being completely sarcastic. Obviously I can’t speak for Jim so I have no idea what is going on in his head.

The total rub of this entire thing is that I have defended Jim against attacks from other local bloggers. I have gone after people for attacking Jim as a person instead of calling his ideas into question. I have even corresponded with Jim via email over the years and guess what I get in return? I get called an idiot.

Well Jim I’m sorry that you see me that way because even though we have disagreed on many an issue, I have never thought you to be an idiot. Yes I think that you are misguided and blinded by partisan politics and religion but deep down I have always thought you to be a good person. I will pray for you Jim and I hope that karma is good to you in the next world because what goes around surely does come around.

Lottery Winner Gives It All Away

A man in Michigan won $10,000 in the state’s lottery and gave the entire thing to the United Way.

Money Quote –

"I was heavily influenced by my close friend Julie, who taught me to think of others first, and to stop and think about what life is really about. I know the needs in the community are great right now, so for me it was the right thing to do," Dancy said in a statement released by the Michigan Lottery.

Currently Listening

1. “Pep Talk” by Descendents (from ALL)
2. “Tack” by Descendents (from Cool To Be You)
3. “In Love This Way” by Descendents (from I Don’t Want to Grow Up)
4. “Band” by Hagfish (from Hagfish)
5. “Minit Maid” by Hagfish (from Buick Men)
6. “Message” by The Pavers (from Wrecking Ball)
7. “Scary Eyes” by The Pavers (from Local 1500)
8. “Mary” by The Pavers (from Wrecking Ball)
9. “Ready, Steady, Go” by Generation X (from Anthology Disc 1)
10. “Dancing with Myself” by Generation X (from Anthology Disc 1)

Divinity & Nature

I was watching Joseph Campbell and The Power of Myth with Bill Moyers Program 2: The Message of Myth yesterday and the role that nature plays in myth was brought up as part of the discussion. There was a basic distinction shown in how different myths and religions view nature. Nature is either seen as something that is corrupt and must be conquered by man (as in the Judea-Christian traditions) or it is seen as an expression of or part of the divine (as in the Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, and Native American traditions). I had never noticed this distinction before, but now that it has been pointed out, it is very glaring.

So what does this tell us about the societies that created these mythologies? In the case on the Judea-Christian societies, it seems to show a strongly paternal society that wants to control the world around them (see Genesis chapters 2 & 3). This is something that can been seen throughout western society and I think that it is safe to say that it is the influence of the Bible that helped build these mores into the western culture. The Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, and Native American societies it seems to show, overall, peoples that prefer to live in harmony with nature instead of controlling it. Obviously I am speaking in generalizations here because one can easily find great differences in the societies that I have lumped together here.

There seems to be a general break between western and eastern cultures and how they view nature and the role of man and the divine in regards to nature. The west sees nature as a force that must be controlled because if it is not, it will corrupt humanity and take man away from God and the east sees nature as something to live in harmony with, going so far as seeing the divine, i.e. God, in nature.

As with any study of religions and mythologies, one must look at the culture that created the material, the part of the world that said culture came from, the time in history, and what kind of world those people were living in to put the mythologies into context. In the case of the Israelites, they lived in a very harsh, desert climate that would make life difficult, so the fact that their religion teaches that nature is to be controlled is not that surprising. In the case of the Native Americans, they lived in a climate that was varied and bountiful, so it makes sense that their religion would promote living in harmony with nature. (Note – Yes I know that the Native Americans are not examples of eastern cultures, but in this case they have more in common with the beliefs of the Hindu and Shinto religions and people than that of the traditional western cultures.)

Personally I find the eastern belief of living in harmony with nature as more productive and overall it just appeals to my philosophy and spirituality. I am also one that believes that we see God in the world around us. We can see God in the trees, rivers, mountains, oceans, and especially in the eyes and smile of a baby. Since the world was made by God, and we were made as part of the world, it is an expression of God and the divine.

For those who are not familiar with Joseph Campbell he was one of the 20th century’s foremost experts on mythology and comparative religions. He’s most famous for his seminal book The Hero with a Thousand Faces which was hugely influential to a young film maker in the 1970’s, George Lucas. You can learn more about Campbell from his Wikipedia entry and from the Joseph Campbell Foundation’s website.

Currently Listening

1. “Little Brother” by Dead To Me (from Little Brother)
2. “Writing Letters” by Dead To Me (from Cuban Ballerina)
3. “Don’t Wanna” by Dead To Me (from Little Brother)
4. “Right” by ALL (from Breaking Things)
5. “Don Quixote” by ALL (from Allroy Sez)
6. “The Skin” by ALL (from Problematic)
7. “The Science of Myth” by Screeching Weasel (from Weasel Mania)
8. “I Wanna Be a Homosexual” by Screeching Weasel (from Weasel Mania)
9. “We Believe” by Roustabouts (from The Only One)
10. “Fall Into Line” by Roustabouts (from The Only One)

Quote of the Day

Lose the labels people. Be yourself. Try to get along with others. Learn to compromise. We will all be better off that way, don't you think?

-- Otter from the post Labels on The Otter Limits

The Right to Be Wrong

The blog Classically Liberal has an excellent post entitled Defending the right to be wrong.

Money Quotes (which happen to be the opening and closing paragraphs of the piece) –

The most difficult right to respect, and this is true for both the Right and the Left, is the right to be wrong. Everyone believes in the right to be right. Very few believe in the right to be wrong. And let me be clear as to what I mean by wrong. I mean an action that may well be destructive or counter-productive to the self, but which does not violate the life, liberty or property of others. Actions that violate the sovereign realm of other people are crimes. It is true that an action can harm others and also harm oneself. It can be both wrong and a crime. However, an action that harms only the self is wrong but not a crime, in liberal thinking at least.

[…]

If this is true, and it seems true to me, then neither Left nor Right have a particular fondness for human freedom. The conservative’s acceptance of free markets (not so obvious in recent years) is only an indication of his contempt for “worldly” wealth and material existence. It is the things of the next world, and the soul, which are really important. The Socialist’s willingness to allow same-sex couples to wed, or their reluctance to ban erotica, is not because they embrace social freedom but because such spiritual matters are unimportant to them. Each side controls that which they value and only grants freedom in the realms they consider unimportant.

As with everything that CLS writes, this is a very through and well thoughtout piece that I have only begun to digest but I felt compelled to share.

Dick Morris: Obama is Right on Student Loans

Dick Morris, who has been no fan of the President's policies, has written a piece entitled Student Loans: Obama Right that is right on the money.

Money Quotes –

Ever since Bill Clinton initiated the direct student lending program, it has offered lower-cost loans to students and given them an alternative to the high-handed rip-offs to which they are exposed when the funding comes from private lenders. The special interests — particularly Sallie Mae, the leading student lender — forced Clinton to allow private lending alongside of the government program. Now Obama is trying to eliminate it. And wisely so.

This issue has nothing to do with growing government. The taxpayer already subsidizes the interest rate and guarantees the loan whether through direct public lending or through private firms. The issue is: Should the lenders make a profit, or should the student pay a lower interest?

[…]

Republicans and some Democrats — who are beholden to Sallie Mae and other private lenders for their generous campaign contributions — will try to pretend that this issue is one of big government vs. small government. It is not. The issue, in its starkest terms, is high college costs vs. somewhat lower costs. Our kids — and their parents — deserve a break.

One of the policies that I always agreed with President Clinton on was his support of education and retraining and helping people to get the funds to get said education. This policy that President Obama is proposing is a good one and is the way that we should be going about helping those going to college in attaining their education.

Rush is Building the American Socialist Empire?

The Washington Post’s Harold Meyerson has an excellent piece out today titled Rush Builds a Revolution.

Money Quote

The young may now disdain Wall Street -- but what do they know of socialism, past and present? Who even speaks of socialism in America today? The answer, of course, is the demagogic right. According to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and their ilk, Obama is taking America down the Socialist Road. As Benjamin Sarlin has noted on the Web site the Daily Beast, the talkmeisters of the right have linked a doctrine that never commanded much support in America to a president whose approval rating hovers around 60 percent and much higher than that among the young.

Rush and his boys are doing what Gene Debs and his comrades never really could. In tandem with Wall Street, they are building socialism in America.

This entire column is quite good and it was hard to find a Money Quote without quoting the entire thing (which I don’t like doing). That having been said, here is another part of the column that I found to be telling –

Moreover, those Americans opting for socialism are doing so when socialists themselves aren't calling for, and don't believe in, the kind of revolutionary transformations -- the abolition of wage labor, say -- for which their forebears routinely campaigned in the days of Debs and the Depression. Today, the world's socialist and social democratic parties basically champion a more social form of capitalism, with tighter regulations on capital, more power for labor and an expanded public sector to do what the private sector cannot (such as providing universal access to health care).

So where does that leave us? Is this really socialism that is being promoted or is it social capitalism? And what is the difference really? I’ll have to admit that I don’t have the answers but Meyerson is right that the demagoguery of those like Limbaugh may have unintended consequences and help to create the exact opposite reaction that they are going for.

Hitler and Socialism

Even though I grow weary of the Hitler label being thrown around all of the time, there is an interesting post on the subject over on Fear an Iarthair.

The big point that Man of the West brings up (and it might not have been intentional) is that everyone’s poop stinks. Those on the “left” are high if they think that they are above reproach, but the same exact thing can be said for those on the “right.” Both sides have harbored evil and promoted bad policies. Both sides would be the ruin of society if left free to run without checks and balances of the other.

So at this point I think we can all safely put the Hitler label to bed, don’t you? The amount that his name gets evoked is mind numbering and it truly lacks intellectual honesty to do so. Now if we could only get people to stop throwing around the term fascism like it is candy…

Dave Needs a Label

Local blogger Dave from Dave Town is looking for a label to describe his political philosophy. My vote goes to Classical Liberal but I also like his idea of Nolabeltariancratapublicans.

Currently Listening

Here’s what the MP3 player gave us today.

1. “Roger” by Dag Nasty (from Wig Out at Denkos)
2. “Drop to My Knees!” by The Tight Bros. From Way Back When (from Runnin’ Thru My Bones)
3. “Downtown Lights” by One Man Army (from Dead End Stories)
4. “So What’cha Want” by Beastie Boys (from Check Your Head)
5. “Ripchord” by Rilo Kiley (from More Adventurous)
6. “Hanging On” by The Eyeliners (from No Apologies)
7. “Tack” by Descendents (from Cool To Be You)
8. “Borrowed Time” by The GC5 (from Kisses from Hanoi / Horseshoes & Handgrenades)
9. “Mouse” by Hagfish (from Buick Men)
10. “Punk Rock Girl” by The Dead Milkmen (from Left of the Dial: Dispatches from the ‘80s Underground Disc 2)

Let’s Talk Meaning…

As in definitions. This is a subject that I covered a few times in the posts Defining conservative and liberal, More definitions, and True liberalism, but recently I was shown another local blogger’s take on what it means to be a conservative and a liberal that I thought was worth exploring.

From the post Conservative, Conservatism:

When it comes right down to it, it is fairly hard to come up with a concise, yet satisfactory, definition of "conservative." For one thing, like liberal, the word can be applied to more than just the political sphere; there are social conservatives, "conservative" chess players, etc. It might be easier to define conservatism as trying not to do anything stupidly risky, things that fly in the face of common sense, that defy the testimony of God in nature and Scripture, that flout history, that ignore the fallen and depraved nature of mankind; as an approach to life and governance that seeks to limit government to the role laid out for it by God, thereby establishing justice and protecting Man's God-given rights. A conservative, then, would be a person who practices conservatism, especially when it comes to governance.

Two things will be seen immediately: first, that conservatism relies implicitly upon a biblical worldview. In my opinion, this is the principal thing that distinguishes it from libertarianism, which shares many of the same positions concerning man's rights, but lacks an adequate intellectual basis for defending them, and therefore results in some most impractical and imprudent positions. Second, that conservatism is not implicitly wed to one particular form of government, though it might be said to be devoted to one particular governmental aim, the fulfillment of its God-given role as minister of justice. Many putative conservatives these days operate on the assumption that conservatism is inseparable from Western-style representative governance, but this is not the case. The first noted conservative of relatively modern times, for example, Edmund Burke, was a committed monarchist. Granted, he favored the unwritten constitution of England, which guaranteed certain rights to all Englishmen, but he was a monarchist nonetheless. A conservative will not make the mistake of thinking that one can govern Baghdad the same way that one governs Amarillo.

From the post Liberal, Liberalism:

"Liberal" is another of those words that can defy concise explanation. However, I believe that in general, if conservatism can be fairly said to be "...trying not to do anything stupidly risky, things that fly in the face of common sense, that defy the testimony of God in nature and Scripture, that flout history, that ignore the fallen and depraved nature of mankind; as an approach to life and governance that seeks to limit government to the role laid out for it by God, thereby establishing justice and protecting Man's God-given rights," then liberalism would be the willingness to do stupidly risky things without regard for common sense, history, the fallen and depraved nature of mankind, the testimony of God in nature and Scripture, and, very often, to use government as an instrument by which it hopes to achieve its often hopelessly ill-defined and unrealistic goals. I would say that in general, the big flaw in liberalism is that it tries to base its approach to life--and governance--on the shifting sands of man's reason untethered to the revelation of God. It starts with autonomous man and tries to reason its way upward, and ends with a society in which justice is sacrificed to every man doing what is right in his own eyes--and indeed, one could make the case that that is its purpose: to allow man to justify what he wants to do anyway as being right.

The first thing that stands out to me in these definitions of conservatism and liberalism is how tied they are to the Bible and thus the Judea-Christian faiths and worldview. My first question is what about those who are Hindus, Buddhists, agnostics, deists, Scientologists, atheists, or any other non-Judea-Christian faith? If I am reading the definitions above correctly, only a member of one of the Judea-Christian religions can be a true conservative and pretty much everything/everyone else is some type of liberal or libertarian (who seem to be viewed as inferior by the author).

My next thought is that it is possible that the author, Fear an Iarthair’s Man of the West (who I have had nothing but good discussions/interactions with), has some misconceptions about where conservatism and liberalism in America come from. According to everything that I have read and studied, American liberalism (and what I call true liberalism) was born out of the Enlightenment and the work of John Locke. Conservatism in Europe rose in response to the liberalism of the Enlightenment and was influenced by the work of Edmund Burke (who is often viewed as the father of modern conservatism). In the United States, the origins of conservatism can be solidly laid at the feet of Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton believed in what’s known as “divine order” which can be broken down (far too simplistically mind you) to the idea that it is the government’s job to keep order in society. His arch nemesis’s Thomas Jefferson and James Madison believed in “sacred liberty” which can be broken down (again far too simplistically) to the idea that the government’s job is to protect the liberty of the citizenry.

While things have changed a great deal since the time of Hamilton and Jefferson, I think that the true core of conservatism and liberalism can be found in their ideals of “divine order” and “sacred liberty.” Much of the modern political conservative and liberal movements have been hijacked by fascists, authoritarians, socialists, and totalitarians who want nothing more than to promote whatever cause will gain them more power. These are all perversions of the true nature of conservatism and liberalism.

So to me, the classical definitions are the one that are the most accurate. Too often throw people mindlessly throw around terms like Nazi and Marxist to try and either confuse the dialogue or because they frankly don’t know what either term really means. Both are overused and honestly do nothing but turn me off and tune me out. If we are to truly understand what it means to be a liberal or a conservative we need to know and understand the history of the philosophies to understand what they are and where they can take us. Both have validity and can provide great ideas, but I disagree with Man of the West because I think neither are bound to any one religion, scripture, or God. They were born out of the hearts and minds of great thinkers who were reacting to and against tyranny and chaos (the extreme of conservatism and liberalism if allowed to run amuck). Neither philosophy has all of the answered and either left unchecked would be disastrous for society.

Top 40 TV Shows of the 1980s

Here is a pretty interesting take on the best TV shows of the 1980’s, but I would have ranked Night Court and Married…with Children much higher.

Currently Listening

Here’s another bunch of songs selected by the shuffle function on my MP3 player.

1. “Open Letter (To a Landlord)” by Living Colour (from Super Hits)
2. “King of Birds” by R.E.M. (from And I Feel Fine…The Best of the I.R.S. Years 1982-1987 Disc 2)
3. “Break on Through” by The Doors (from The Doors)
4. “Spin the Bottle” by The Juliana Hatfield Three (from What You Are)
5. “Ambulance” by Hagfish (from Buick Men)
6. “Different Breed” by The Hudson Falcons (from For Those Whose Hearts and Souls Are True)
7. “Down by the Ocean” by Saigon Kick (from Saigon Kick)
8. “Planet of the Apes” by Screeching Weasel (from Weasel Mania)
9. “Full Moon Turn My Head Around” by The Methadones (from 21st Century Power Pop Riot)
10. “Move Any Mountain” by The Shamen (from En-Tact)

Currently Watching

Title: NOVA – The Bible’s Buried Secrets: Beyond Fact or Fiction (official site, interview with executive producer Paula S. Apsell)

Sometime last summer NOVA and PBS caused a stir with the announcement of the program The Bible’s Buried Secrets. Immediately groups like the AFA were calling for boycotts of PBS because they believed that the NOVA special was going to attack the Bible (all without having seen the program mind you). The controversy came and went before the program aired and now it is on DVD.

The Bible’s Buried Secrets is a detailed look at the Bible and its archeological past. Some of the topics covered are the Exodus, the origins of the Israelites, the Kingdom of David and Solomon, the exile in Babylonia, and the creation of the Hebrew Bible. The documentary is very well done and is no way an attack or an affront on the religions of Judaism, Christianity, or Islam. It does however take a fairly objective look at the Biblical text versus the archeological evidence.

My only complaint with the documentary is that it neglected to mention the influence that Zoroastrianism had on the Israelites while in exile in Babylon. Other than that, this is a very well done piece of film making and will be something that I someday include in my religion classes.

Currently Listening

1. “I Need Feedback” by Swingin’ Utters (from Five Lessons Learned)
2. “There is a Light That Never Goes Out” by The Smiths (from Singles)
3. “Avenues & Alleyways” by Rancid (from …And Out Come the Wolves)
4. “Bizarre Love Triangle” by New Order (from Substance Disc 1)
5. “Cherub Rock” by The Smashing Pumpkins (from Siamese Dream)
6. “Here We Go” by Shelter (from Mantra)
7. “Close to Me” by The Cure (from Greatest Hits)
8. “Jealous Again” by The Black Crowes (from Shake Your Money Maker)
9. “Seventeen” by The Sex Pistols (from Never Mind the Bollocks Here’s the Sex Pistols)
10. “Divine Thing” by The Soup Dragons (from Hotwired)

My Philosophical Base

I got the idea for this post from something that Fear an Iarthair’s Man of the West brought up in the comments of this post.

I grew up in the Episcopalian Church and was very active in the church throughout all of junior high and the early part of high school. My mother, who has been a big influence on me, was working on her degrees in Religious Studies and Anthropology throughout my childhood (often stopping and starting back up after we moved). As a result I had been exposed to Buddhist and Hindu imagery (she has a great statue of the Buddha that I always loved as a kid and honestly I wish that I had a stature like it now) along with Jamaican art and tons of books on different religions.

Early on I recognized the similarities between the religions of the world and saw the folly in the attitude that religion A is the only true religion and the only path to salvation. I’ve also believed in evolution for as long as I can remember and these beliefs came out during discussions in church (which seemed to drive my youth pastor crazy). I still attended church, went through confirmation, and was the church’s head acolyte (a.k.a. alter boy) assisting in the running of church services including at times the Eucharist.

Then in 1992 the campaign of then Governor Bill Clinton really hit home to me. He was saying that things that I believed and honestly still believe. His approach was something that was such a breath of fresh air that I became a huge Clinton supporter. Granted he ended up disappointing me, but that is another topic. At the time Clinton was promoting what he called the New Democrats, which were basically centrist Democrats. This is where I fell in with the Democratic Party. That branch of the party seems to have disappeared and subsequently I’ve left the party.

Since that time I have begun my study of the religions of the world (thanks to the fantastic class Comparative Religions at OCCC) and that study has confirmed what my instincts told me as a kid: the religions of the world all teach basically the same thing. In fact the core teachings of nearly all of the world’s religions can be summed up in three categories: 1) don’t murder, 2) don’t screw people over, and 3) live your life in service to others. Yet even though with so much in common, people are still killing each other every day in the name of religion (some in the name of the same flippin’ God).

I firmly believe in God, but I believe that God has spoken to different people in different ways, thus we have the thousands of religions that we do throughout the world. Some people pray to Yahweh, some to Buddha, some to Kali, but to me that name is irrelevant, “a rose by any other name…” so to speak. This is why I have referred to myself as a deist, but many of my beliefs also coincide with the universalism philosophy.

I also firmly believe in morality, virtue, and ethics but I believe that these things are ingrained in us as part of our humanity and do not come from religion per se. It is true that some people need the guidance of religion to find morality, virtue, and ethics but to me religion is just one of the vehicles that we can use to find these things. In this way my thinking is slightly Humanist (even though from my limited research on the subject, admitted Humanists cannot agree on what it means to be a Humanist).

My political philosophy is something that comes from my deep seated belief in freedom and liberty as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and Clinton campaign of centrist (or slightly left of center) politics of 1992. Since then I have read books on the Founding Fathers and read a bit about John Locke (but not as much as I’d like admittedly) and have found my beliefs to be very harmonious with the thinking of the Enlightenment, which so greatly influenced our founders. In this I believe that it is the governments job to provide for equality under the law to all citizens, provide for equality of opportunity (but not outcome) for all citizens, provide for the defense of the country, and to provide a safety net for the citizenry when needed; to protect against the excesses of companies abusing the market and to provide a hand up for those in need (but not something to live off of for life).

Humanity has a great potential to do amazing things and I believe that we haven’t even begun to scratch the surface of that potential. The only way for us to reach our potential is through freedom and liberty and that is what makes this country great. Despite all of our many flaws, America is still the best place on Earth for people to discover their potential through perseverance and hard work. I truly believe that we all can achieve our dreams if we go for it, work hard, and make the right decisions, but no matter what it is up to us, the individual, to determine whether or not we are successful.

So as you can see, my philosophical base is drawn from a hodgepodge of sources that have brought me to where I am today. I am still learning and studying so this is just part of the journey of life and how I see the world. I am always looking for new ideas to consider and points of view to ponder so this is a voyage that will never end until my time on this Earth has come to a close. So please, bring me your thoughts, ideas, and suggestions…I welcome and look forward to them all. We can all learn something from everyone…that is something else that I firmly believe.

Edge of Space Discovered

I have to admit that when I saw the headline Scientists Locate the ‘Edge of Space’ I thought that they were referring to the edge of the universe, which I thought would be super awesome. Instead that story is about a group of scientists that have located the point where they believe that the Earth’s atmosphere stops and space starts.

Money Quote –

A lot remains very fuzzy, however, as the boundary is surrounded by a host of misconceptions and confusing, conflicting definitions.

As with any new discovery, this one seems to have created more questions then it has answered.

Reacting Towards the Center

I have always considered myself a classical liberal and a centrist in my political philosophy. In other words I believe in freedom, liberty, free thought, but I also understand that I do not have all of the answers and neither does any one political party or philosophy. I have strived to keep an open mind and listen to the ideas of all of those around me, giving each consideration before passing judgment (granted I don’t always succeed but I try). In doing this, there are many traditional liberal beliefs that I hold and traditional conservative beliefs that I hold (along with many libertarian and a few socialist/collectivist).

What I have noticed is that often the person that I am discussing/debating with will bring out certain aspects of my philosophy. If I am debating with a hard line conservative then I will often argue the liberal/libertarian part of my thought process. If I am debating with a hard line leftist then I will argue the conservative/libertarian part. It seems that more times than not I fall back on the libertarian part of my thinking, if for no other reason it seems to drive both the liberals and conservatives crazy. But no matter what idea/ideal I am arguing, it is nearly always trying to move towards the center.

I’ve also noticed this with politicians. When a specific president for example moves too far to either extreme, I always react against that movement in a desire to bring things back to the center. I truly believe that centrist politics are the way to go because the extremes of both of the major parties (and off all philosophies) are just nuts. So when President Bush started to abuse his power in a neo-conservative/totalitarian manner, the liberal/libertarian in me jump up and said “hell no” and now when President Obama is abusing his power and not living up to his campaign promises in a ultra-liberal/socialist manner, the libertarian/conservative in me jumps up and says “hell no.” No matter who is in control, if we let them get too much power it will end in some form of authoritarian/totalitarian order that is completely un-American, anti-freedom, and goes against everything that our Founding Fathers were about.

So what does this say about me? Some will sure think that I am a wishy washy flip-flopper and others with say that I’m either a schizo or suffer from multiple personality disorder, and maybe they’re right. I think that much of my philosophy comes from the firm belief that the truth is always somewhere in the middle. It’s like that old adage that talks about how when two people see the same event and then recant what they saw, the actual truth of the matter is usually somewhere in-between the two stories. I think this is the case, especially with politics (and religion, but that is a topic for another time). No one holds a monopoly on the truth. There are just as many conservative liars and cheats as there are liberal liars and cheats. There are also just as many good, honest, hard working liberals as there are good, honest, hard working conservatives, and to think otherwise is folly. As I get older I have noticed that the libertarian in me has gained more prominence, but then again my core beliefs have always been classically liberal in nature.

So if you see me one minute railing against President Obama and the next minute taking Senator Inhofe to task, this is why. I’m not sure that any of it makes sense but it was something that I observed in myself. I only wonder if there are others out there who do the same thing.

Capitalize or not to capitalize, That is the Question

Recently I’ve started to wonder if I should capitalize the words in the headlines/titles for my posts. Looking over posts that I’ve done in the past I’ve noticed that I’ve done both, but I have to wonder if there is a “proper” method. In journalism classes I was always taught to capitalize the words in a headline, but even now I see newspapers that do not follow this rule.

So what is the proper blog etiquette on headlines/titles? Is there one? Should there be one? Should bloggers follow traditional rules of journalism? Does it even matter? What do you think?

Which Do You Prefer to Read?

I’ve noticed two major trends with blogs and their content. First there are the blogs that create mostly original content. These blogs link to other articles/posts but primarily provide their own analysis of the story (while at times including block quotes from the original source). Second there are the blogs that primarily quote stories from other sources in their entirety. These blogs will from time to time include their own commentary but generally are copying and pasting other peoples work. Now to be fair, all bloggers from time to time do both of these types of posts, but it seems to me that generally most seem to do one or the other.

So my question is to you my fellow blogger…which do you prefer to read?

Note – I thought that I had done a post on this subject (or something similar at least) in the past, but I was unable to find it digging through my archives.

I LOVE My MP3 Player

A couple of months ago I purchased an MP3 player. The first one that I got was a cheap piece of junk that pretty much died as soon as I took it out of its case. A couple of weeks later I found a nice Sansa brand 8 GB MP3 player at Wal-Mart on clearance for about $50. Needless to say I jumped on it and have been loving the heck out of it ever since. Sure at first I ran into some P.B.C.A.K. errors but since then I have figured out the proper way to load music and change out songs and now it works like a charm. The best part about this thing is that I can have it in one ear while listening to a customer in the other at work and what a difference it makes in getting through the day when you are listening to your favorite tunes. Thank you to whoever invented this amazing little gadget!!!

Currently Listening

1. “Angel of the Morning” by Barnyard Slut (from Space Age Motel)
2. “A Boy Named Sue” by ALL (from Dot [EP])
3. “The Joker” by Black Train Jack (from You’re Not Alone)
4. “Sunday Morning Coming Down” by The Brassknuckle Boys (from American Bastard)
5. “12XU” by Dag Nasty (from Field Day)
6. “It’s a Long Way to the Top (If You Wanna Rock ‘n’ Roll)” by Dropkick Murphys (from Singles Collection, Vol. 2)
7. “Twisting” by Hagfish (from Hagfish)
8. “My Generation” by Green Day (from Kerplunk)
9. “Handle with Care” by Jenny Lewis with the Watson Twins (from Rabbit Fur Coat)
10. “Wendy” by Descendents (from Enjoy!)

Customer Service and All that is Wrong in the World

As I’m reading the book Your Call Is (not that) Important To Us, it really is pointing out so many parallels between the sad state of the customer service industry and the country and economy in general.

Most people see dealing with customer service as a nightmare. There are the horrible automated systems to navigate, the representatives who may or may not have any idea about what you are talking about (and may or may not care), the behemoth companies that we all know could care less about the individual customers, and the fact that it is all a giant bureaucracy that no one has any control over (especially not the customer nor the customer service representative).

On the flip side you have the customer service representatives and agents who are just trying to make a living, trying to balance the demands of the customer and the demands of the company, and who get verbally, mentally, and intellectually abused by customers and management on a daily basis. These agents are trying their hardest to help their customers and meet the metrics and statistics set by the company (these things are not always conducive to one another).

So here we have a bad situation from the get go. Customers often go into dealing with customer service with a bad attitude (thanks to prior bad experiences and horror stories from friends, not to mention carrying whatever baggage from their lives that may be eating away at them), thus setting the stage for a bad experience. The agents often also go into each call with a bad attitude (it’s not easy to get chipper after being yelled at by someone you are trying to help or by your boss). And what does all of this accomplish? Nothing except a self-fulfilling prophecy that’s what. Now how is that fair to anyone involved?

Much of the problem is the short-sightedness of most corporations. This is something that the head of AT&T understood in the early days of the 20th century; from p. 22 & 23 of Your Call Is (not that) Important To Us:

(Theodore Newton) Vail believed that taking care of the customer—good relations between the customer and the company—was the most important thing a corporation could do for its long-term health and profit. He believed that corporations had a public trust with their customers as much as they did with their investors. Bucking the trend of the time, he advocated that profits should be funneled back into the company for service improvements and not solely doled out to investors. He preached that the long-term health of the company and satisfaction of its customers should not be subordinated to the short-term gain of the shareholders.

(…)

In the 1910 AT&T Annual Report, Vail summed up some pitfalls of the customer service business then, which endure today. He talked about business from the point of view of both the customer and the company. Such compassion, or even compassionate lip-service, was not common among corporate leaders in those days. “There has always been and will always be the laudable desire,” Vail said, “of the great public to be served rightly, and as cheaply as possible, which sometimes selfishly degenerates into a lack of consideration for the rights of those who are serving. On the other hand there has always been the laudable desire of the ‘server,’ or the producer, to get a profit for his services or production, which sometimes degenerates into a selfish disregard or a lack of consideration for the rights of those who are served.”

Where is that kind of wisdom in our leaders today? Where are the CEO’s preaching this kind of business philosophy? I firmly believe that had the businesses and corporations in America followed Mr. Vail’s advice we wouldn’t be in the financial mess that we’re in today. Had our leaders had the wisdom to hold such a holistic outlook and philosophy I suspect that thing would be better today than they are. And that goes not only for our business leaders but our political leaders as well.

Too often our politics turns into the nonsense of us vs. them that accomplishes nothing. Instead of having compassion and empathy for those we disagree with, we instead look at those with opposing views as the enemy and go into all “debate” and “discourse” firmly believing that the other guy is wrong. This is another prime example of a self-fulfilling prophecy. And while our government gets even more bogged down with bureaucracy and burdens that it was never intended to carry, our leaders go into the situation just like the customer goes into calling customer service. Everyone seems to have a chip on their shoulder and no one seems to be listening.

So how do we fix this mess? I think a good start would be to follow the advice and lead of Theodore Newton Vail. By taking a holistic approach to our problems, our eyes will be open to see all of the possible solutions and thus we will be able to work together honestly and openly in bringing about the best solution possible. This is obviously easier sad than done, but I think it is possible. Maybe it’s not possible with our current leaders but it is still possible nonetheless. All we need to do is work together and work as hard as we can and anything is possible.