Video of the Day

"My Lil Wayne" by Margaret Cho


This is a song that Margaret Cho did with Ben Lee. You can read more about the collaboration here. Who knew that she could sing?

How Millennial are You?

Take the quiz.

My Results –

Your Millennial score is 76!
The higher your score, the more you have in common with members of the Millennial generation.

Most of the questions seemed to deal with technology, but the final question was about how you describe your political beliefs. There were three choices: conservative, moderate, and liberal. I picked liberal but nearly picked moderate.

Thanks to Chris Bodenner at The Daily Dish for the find.

Quote of the Day

Which is, after all, the highest purpose of government: to find avenues to charge people.

-- Charles G. Hill from the post Lawmakes are incensed

Currently Listening

After my post yesterday about Weezer, I decided to do a Weezer shuffle this morning.

1. “O Girlfriend” (from Weezer: The Green Album)
2. “The World Has Turned and Left Me Here” (from Weezer: The Blue Album)
3. “Pardon Me” (from Make Believe)
4. “The Other Way” (from Make Believe)
5. “Getchoo” (from Pinkerton)
6. “Possibilities” (from Maladroit)
7. “Troublemaker” (from Weezer: The Red Album)
8. “Everybody Get Dangerous” (from Weezer: The Red Album)
9. “Only in Dreams” (from Weezer: The Blue Album)
10. “Across the Sea” (from Pinkerton)

Great Band Alert: Poema

Hailing from Albuquerque, NM, Poema are a pop duet that I could totally see becoming huge on Radio Disney. Their music reminds me a of a poppy Watson Twins. For more info on Poema, check them out on MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube.

What Could Possibly be the First Temple Discovered in Turkey

According to this story, a site that appears to be a temple has been found in Turkey that predates the Great Pyramid, Stonehenge, and pottery.

From the story --

They call it potbelly hill, after the soft, round contour of this final lookout in southeastern Turkey. To the north are forested mountains. East of the hill lies the biblical plain of Harran, and to the south is the Syrian border, visible 20 miles away, pointing toward the ancient lands of Mesopotamia and the Fertile Crescent, the region that gave rise to human civilization. And under our feet, according to archeologist Klaus Schmidt, are the stones that mark the spot—the exact spot—where humans began that ascent.

Standing on the hill at dawn, overseeing a team of 40 Kurdish diggers, the German-born archeologist waves a hand over his discovery here, a revolution in the story of human origins. Schmidt has uncovered a vast and beautiful temple complex, a structure so ancient that it may be the very first thing human beings ever built. The site isn't just old, it redefines old: the temple was built 11,500 years ago—a staggering 7,000 years before the Great Pyramid, and more than 6,000 years before Stonehenge first took shape. The ruins are so early that they predate villages, pottery, domesticated animals, and even agriculture—the first embers of civilization. In fact, Schmidt thinks the temple itself, built after the end of the last Ice Age by hunter-gatherers, became that ember—the spark that launched mankind toward farming, urban life, and all that followed.

Göbekli Tepe—the name in Turkish for "potbelly hill"—lays art and religion squarely at the start of that journey. After a dozen years of patient work, Schmidt has uncovered what he thinks is definitive proof that a huge ceremonial site flourished here, a "Rome of the Ice Age," as he puts it, where hunter-gatherers met to build a complex religious community. Across the hill, he has found carved and polished circles of stone, with terrazzo flooring and double benches. All the circles feature massive T-shaped pillars that evoke the monoliths of Easter Island.

Though not as large as Stonehenge—the biggest circle is 30 yards across, the tallest pillars 17 feet high—the ruins are astonishing in number. Last year Schmidt found his third and fourth examples of the temples. Ground-penetrating radar indicates that another 15 to 20 such monumental ruins lie under the surface. Schmidt's German-Turkish team has also uncovered some 50 of the huge pillars, including two found in his most recent dig season that are not just the biggest yet, but, according to carbon dating, are the oldest monumental artworks in the world.

The new discoveries are finally beginning to reshape the slow-moving consensus of archeology. Göbekli Tepe is "unbelievably big and amazing, at a ridiculously early date," according to Ian Hodder, director of Stanford's archeology program. Enthusing over the "huge great stones and fantastic, highly refined art" at Göbekli, Hodder—who has spent decades on rival Neolithic sites—says: "Many people think that it changes everything…It overturns the whole apple cart. All our theories were wrong."

Schmidt's thesis is simple and bold: it was the urge to worship that brought mankind together in the very first urban conglomerations. The need to build and maintain this temple, he says, drove the builders to seek stable food sources, like grains and animals that could be domesticated, and then to settle down to guard their new way of life. The temple begat the city.

This theory reverses a standard chronology of human origins, in which primitive man went through a "Neolithic revolution" 10,000 to 12,000 years ago. In the old model, shepherds and farmers appeared first, and then created pottery, villages, cities, specialized labor, kings, writing, art, and—somewhere on the way to the airplane—organized religion. As far back as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, thinkers have argued that the social compact of cities came first, and only then the "high" religions with their great temples, a paradigm still taught in American high schools.

Religion now appears so early in civilized life—earlier than civilized life, if Schmidt is correct—that some think it may be less a product of culture than a cause of it, less a revelation than a genetic inheritance. The archeologist Jacques Cauvin once posited that "the beginning of the gods was the beginning of agriculture," and Göbekli may prove his case.

It will be interesting to see how this research continues to develop as the site is further excavated. I would honestly not be surprised to see that religion helped develop civilization and not the other way around.

Thanks to Unreasonable Faith for the find.

Generation Zero

I just watched the trailer for the documentary Generation Zero and I must say that it looks like a fascinating film. The film apparently takes a lot from the book The Fourth Turning, which I heard discussed once on the radio and found to be intriguing (admittedly though I have not read the book).

Thanks to jenx67 for the find.

Back When Weezer Ruled…

They put out songs like this:


What happened?!? Sure they can still put together a catchy tune, but so much of their new music seems to lack the heart and the passion of their early material.

Video of the Day

"Catch My Disease" by Ben Lee


I know that yesterday’s video was also by Ben Lee, but sometimes I get on these kicks and focus on one artist over another. Besides this has got to be one of the greatest pop songs ever written.

When Faith Goes All Sorts of Wrong

Headline: Baby ‘starved to death’ because he did not say Amen

There’s honestly not much to say about this one other than maybe “wow” (and that’s not a good “wow” either).

Equal Treatment or Preferential Treatment?

The Red Dirt Gorilla has an angry and thought provoking post entitled English, Mother Fucker, Do You Speak It? that is definitely worth checking out. It should be the beginnings of an interesting conversation (I left a comment but as of this posting it has yet to be approved).

Currently Reading

Title: Fablehave (Wikipedia, Amazon)
Author: Brandon Mull (Official, MySpace, Wikipedia)
Publisher: Aladdin Paperbacks (Wikipedia)

Fablehaven is another book that has been sitting on my to-read shelf for a few years but when someone at work recommended the series I decided to give it a shot. The book centers around a brother and sister who go to stay with their grandparents for a month while their parents go on a cruise. Their grandparents live in the middle of nowhere and eventually the kids learn the secret of the property…it is a haven for mystical creatures.

So far Fablehaven is an enjoyable read that reminds me a lot of The Spiderwick Chronicles (the plots themselves aren’t the same and I’m not sure which came first but both deal with kids who learn about the existence of fairies and mystical creatures).

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a Down By Law shuffle.

1. “Surf Punk” (from Down By Law)
2. “Giving It All Away” (from All Scratched Up!)
3. “500 Miles” (from punkrockacademyfightsong)
4. “D.J.G.” (from Last of the Sharpshooters)
5. “The One” (from Down By Law)
6. “Dreams Away” (from Down By Law)
7. “Looking for Something” (from Blue)
8. “Far and Away” (from All Scratched Up!)
9. “Finally Here” (from Blue)
10. “Punk Won” (from punkrockacademyfightsong)

I Haven’t Seen Avatar Yet…

But after watching this nonsense, I now really want to.

Thanks to Unreasonable Faith for the find.

Great Band Alert: Mike Mains & the Branches

Hailing from Owosso, MI, Mike Mains & the Branches are a fun indie rock band that fans of Vampire Weekend and Rilo Kiley are sure to dig. For more info on the band check them out on MySpace and Facebook.

I Case You Didn’t Know…

The Pixies are sellouts.

From the story –

"We're interested in anything that's going to earn us a fair wage. It's not to say it's not about art, but we made that art fucking 20 years ago. So forget the fucking goddamn art. This ain't about the art anymore. I did the arty farty part. Now it's time to talk about the money. How much do you think we should sell the tickets for? Where do you think we should play? How many shows do you think we should play?"

There is a part of me that doesn’t blame the band at all. They need to make a living, provide for their families, and save for retirement so the fact that they are in this for money doesn’t bother me all that much. In fact it’s kind of refreshing to see Frank Black being so brutally honest about it.

Video of the Day

"Ben Lee" by Ben Lee


This is actually a cover of a song by The Ataris (which you check out here). The song is hilarious, especially when it’s done by the guy it’s designed to bash.

Books vs. Films: Percy Jackson & the Olympians The Lightning Thief

This post is the first in a series that I’ve been pondering for some time. In these posts I will be comparing and contrasting books and the film adaptation based on said books. I did one of these posts for my Prince Charming blog project about The Wonderful Wizard of Oz but for whatever reason have not gotten around doing them here. Then I saw The Lightning Thief…

***SPOILER WARNING**** Before I go any further, I need to warn people upfront that I will be discussing this book and movie in some details, thus if you haven’t seen the film or read the book and don’t want to get spoiled for either, please stop reading.

The film adaptation of Percy Jackson & the Olympians The Lightning Thief (Official, IMDB, Wikipedia) had a lot going for it. First off the book (Official, Wikipedia) was already wildly popular but beyond that is a fun and visual story that is a traditional hero’s quest without seeming tired or stale. Second, the film was directed by Chris Columbus (IMDB, Wikipedia) who directed the first two Harry Potter films along with the classics Adventures in Babysitting, Home Alone, and Mrs. Doubtfire. If that wasn’t enough, the film’s trailer looked fantastic.

Movie adaptations are never just like the book and The Lightning Thief is no different. Right from the opening scene, the film diverges from the book with a confrontation between Percy’s father Poseidon and Zeus (played by Sean Bean [IMDB, Wikipedia]). In it Zeus accused Poseidon of having his son steal the Master Bolt. This scene never happened in the book. In fact that book takes quite a while to reveal the identity of Percy’s father. The game of capture the flag is also different but the version in the film works. Also Percy’s quest is for a different reason and the final battle is nothing like the book. My digest complaint about the film is that the reasons behind the theft of Zeus’ Master Bolt weren’t anywhere near as in-depth as in the book. The entire Kronos plot was removed and I found that disappointing. I have a feeling that Kronos becomes a big part in the rest of the series and I’m just not sure how they will add that back into the story if they continue to do further adaptations.

All that having been said, The Lightning Thief is a great film. Overall the casting was fantastic (though I wasn’t that impressed with Pierce Brosnan as Chiron). Logan Leman (IMDB, Wikipedia) did a really good job as Percy, though I felt he was channeling Zac Efron a bit, but it worked. Alexandra Daddario (IMDB, Wikipedia) did a superb job as Athena’s daughter Annabeth and Brandon T. Jackson (IMDB, Wikipedia) was also quite good as Grover, although his version of the character was much hipper than the Grover of the book.

This is a film and a book that I would highly recommend, but I would definitely suggest reading the book first, unless you are one of those purists who can’t enjoy a film or television adaptation of a book that you love. If you are one of those types, then either read the book or see the movie…don’t do both.

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a Big Drill Car shuffle.

1. “Surrender” (from A Never Ending Endeavor)
2. “Nagain” (from No Worse for the Wear)
3. “Take Away” (from Batch)
4. “Duck and Cover” (from No Worse for the Wear)
5. “Restless Habits” (from Batch)
6. “Let Me Walk” (from Small Block)
7. “If It’s Poison” (from Batch)
8. “Yer Holdin’” (from No Worse for the Wear)
9. “Never Ending Endeavor” (from Batch)
10. “No Need” (from Album/Tape/CD Type Thing)

The Disappearing Record Store

JenX67 has an excellent post about the sad state of record stores entitled the disappearing record store (i’m much too young to feel this damn old). Luckily all hope is not lost for the OKC metro area. We have two great record stores in the area in Guestroom Records (Official, MySpace) and Size Records (Official, MySpace). I highly suggest checking out and supporting both.

Hummer No More

GM’s sale of the Hummer to a Chinese company has fallen through and thus the brand will be dismantled. According to the story, GM will still entertain last minute bids to buy Hummer but otherwise the SUV is history.

I have never been a fan of the Hummer. I’ve never understood why anyone would need or want a tricked-out pseudo-military grade vehicle. To me this vehicle represented the worst kind of excess and so there is a part of me that is happy to see it go by the wayside. That having been said, I hate to see the employees of Hummer losing their jobs.

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a Flogging Molly shuffle.

1. “Punch Drunk Grinning Soul” (from Float)
2. “If I Ever Leave This World Alive” (from Drunken Lullabies)
3. “Life in Tenement Square” (from Swagger)
4. “From the Back of a Broken Dream” (from Float)
5. “These Exiled Years” (from Swagger)
6. “The Spoken Wheel” (from Within a Mile of Home)
7. “Black Friday Rule” (from Swagger)
8. “Whistles the Wind” (from Within a Mile of Home)
9. “The Likes of You Again” (from Swagger)
10. “Swagger” (from Drunken Lullabies)

Clichés and Covers

Aidan at A Dribble of Ink has put together an excellent post entitled I Ask You Cliches – A Double Standard? that asks why publishers produce some many books with clichéd covers, yet look down on clichés in the story. For those interested, there is a pretty good discussion of the matter going on in the comments section of the post. I suggest checking it out.

Members of Hagfish, Only Crime, Gorilla Biscuits, & Riverboat Gamblers Perform in Descendents Tribute Band in Pre-SXSW Show

PunkNews.org is reporting the lineup for the End Sounds pre-SXSW show includes a one-night only Descendents tribute band.

From the story –

End Sounds has announced the line-up for the Third Annual End Sounds Pre-SXSW Show/Party. The event (sponsored by Punknews.org, Jakprints, and Vans) will feature Inside Hope, a one-time Descendents tribute band and will be happening on March 16 at Red 7 in Austin, TX (the night before SXSW music starts). Musicians taking part include Mike Herrera (MxPx, Tumbledown), Mike Weibe (Riverboat Gamblers), Zach Blair (Rise Against, GWAR, Hagfish, Only Crime), Luke Abbey (Gorilla Biscuits, Warzone), Doni Blair (Toadies, Hagfish, Only Crime), Rob Marchant (Riverboat Gamblers, Slowride) and Tony Barsotti (Hagfish).

Man I hope someone records this and posts it on YouTube!

When Celebrities Evoke Jesus…

It’s often kind of creepy. Case in point, Zach Dionne at PopEater put together Eight Cringeworthy Celebrity Jesus Moments. Gotta love it.

10 for 2010: Swingin’ Utters

Here is the latest edition of 10 for 2010, which I’ve decided to try to do one of these each Wednesday. This week we are doing San Francisco’s Swingin’ Utters. Without any further ado, here are my 10 favorite Utters songs, in no particular order and with links to videos when possible.

1. “No Eager Men” (from The Streets of San Francisco)
2. “The Next in Line” (from A Juvenile Product of the Working Class)
3. “Glad” (from Dead Flowers, Bottles, Bluegrass, and Bones)
4. “My Glass House” (from Swingin’ Utters)
5. “I Need Feedback” (from Five Lessons Learned)
6. “Pills & Smoke” (from Swingin’ Utters)
7. “Windspitting Punk” (from A Juvenile Product of the Working Class)
8. “Well Wisher” (from The Streets of San Francisco)
9. “The Note” (from Swingin’ Utters)
10. “You Haven't Seen Yourself In Years” (from BYO Split Series, Vol. 2)

Honorable Mentions –
“Teen Idol Eyes” (from Swingin’ Utters)
“Twenty-Three” (from Brazen Head EP)
“Teenage Genocide” (from The Streets of San Francisco)
“Catastrophe” (from The Streets of San Francisco)

Oh I Don’t Know…

Fox is working on doing a remake of Adventures in Babysitting with a guy as the babysitter. I have no issues with portraying a babysitter as a dude, but I do think all of these remakes are getting a little ridiculous. The next thing you know, there will be a remake of Manos: The Hands of Fate with Gerard Butler as the dad, Angelina Jolie as the mom, Abigail Breslin as the daughter, and Matthew McConaughey as Torgo.

That’s One Big Dog

Meet the tallest dog ever.

Silver and Gold: Grandstanding, a Serious Protest, or Lunacy?

According to this story, South Carolina State Representative Michael Pitts has proposed a bill that would ban “all federal currency as legal tender in favor of using silver and gold coins.” Obviously this is a bill that will never pass because if it did the repercussions would be staggering. Like Rep. Pitts, I am very concerned about our out of control spending, but a bill like this would only make things worse.

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a Street Dogs shuffle.

1. “Unions and the Law” (from Back to the World)
2. “Shards of Life (from Fading American Dream)
3. “Hands Down” (from Back to the World)
4. “Fading American Dream” (from Fading American Dream)
5. “Cut Down on the 12th” (from Savin Hill)
6. “Stand Up” (from Savin Hill)
7. “Fatty” (from Fading American Dream)
8. “Stagger” (from Back to the World)
9. “Drink Tonight” (from Back to the World)
10. “Elizabeth” (from State of Grace)

Third Parties are a Bad Thing?

According to State Representative Wallace Collins they are.

Video of the Day

"Giving Up the Gun" by Vampire Weekend


I know that the hype around this band is just retardedly huge and honestly I've avoided their new record for that very reason, but I saw that Leslie Simon had done a post about their latest video and wouldn't you know it...the song is actually really good. Go figure.

Handicapped Kid’s are God’s Punishment

"The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children. ... In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There’s a special punishment Christians would suggest,"

-- Virginia delegate Bob Marshall.

I’m honestly not sure what to say about this. I’m flabbergasted. I guess that I was a punishment from God seeing as I was born with one hand. I’m glad to know that how’s this fanatic sees people like myself (and I’m lucky…there’s many many worse things than being born with one hand).

Thanks to Andrew Sullivan for the find.

Something to Ponder

In chemistry, the Law of Conservation of Mass states that atoms cannot be created of destroyed in chemical reactions. So taking that one step further, then there are the same number of atoms on Earth that there were when the planet came into existence (more or less taking into account strikes my asteroids, meteors, etc.). If that is the case, then how has the population of the planet grown and changed so dramatically? How can there be over 6 billion people on the planet if there is the same number of atoms on Earth as there were millions of years ago when the planet formed?

My wife and I were discussing this the other night and I have to admit that this is kind of hard for me to wrap my head around. Of course it is entirely possible that I am misinterpreting that Law of Conservation of Mass or that there is some other law out there that we didn’t touch on in my chemistry class. More than anything, I thought it was something neat to think about.

Currently Watching

Title: 30 Rock Season 3 (Official, Amazon, Wikipedia)

Tina Fey and co. return with hilarity, hijinks, and tomfoolery at the NBC studios. If you were a fan of the first two seasons, season three is sure to not disappoint.

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing an R.E.M. shuffle.

1. “Ages of You” (from Dead Letter Office)
2. “Nightswimming” (from Automatic for the People)
3. “West of the Fields” (from Murmur)
4. “Daysleeper” (from In Time 1988-2003)
5. “Finest Worksong [Other Mix]” (from And I Feel Fine…! The Best of R.E.M. the I.R.S. Years 1982-1987 [Bonus CD] Disc 2)
6. “It’s the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)” (from MTV Unplugged)
7. “Little America” (from Reckoning)
8. “Exhuming McCarthy” (from Document)
9. “Green Grow the Rushes” (from Fables of the Reconstruction)
10. “Low” (from MTV Unplugged)

Cover Wars: "Rusty Cage"

Soundgarden vs. Johnny Cash





My Vote: Johnny Cash (even though I love the Soundgarden version too)

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a Dropkick Murphys shuffle.

1. “Eurotrash” (from Boys on the Docks)
2. “Front Seat” (from Boys on the Docks)
3. “Mob Mentality” (from Mod Mentality)
4. “The Spicy McHaggis Jig” (from Sing Loud, Sing Proud)
5. “The Outcast” (from Blackout)
6. “Bastards on Parade” (from Blackout)
7. “Informer” (from Mod Mentality)
8. “The Green Fields of France (No Man’s Land)” (from The Warrior’s Code)
9. “Kiss Me I’m #!@* Faced” (from Blackout)
10. “Finnegan’s Wake” (from Do or Die)

Ron Paul Wins CPAC Presidential Straw Poll; Glenn Beck Takes on Everybody

In what can probably be described as a surprise, Texas Representative Ron Paul won this year’s Conservative Political Action Committee Presidential straw poll. The libertarian leaning Paul beat out both Mitt Romney, who has won this poll for the last four years, and Sarah Palin.

Here are the full results -- Rep. Ron Paul (31 percent), Mitt Romney (22 percent), Sarah Palin (7 percent), Gov. Tim Pawlenty (6 percent), Rep. Mike Pence (5 percent), Mike Huckabee (4 percent), Newt Gingrich (4 percent), Gov. Mitch Daniels (2 percent), Rick Santorum (2 percent), Sen. John Thune (2 percent), and Gov. Haley Barbour (1 percent).

Andrew Sullivan chimed in on Paul’s victory with the following –

At least Paul has some core integrity; at least he believes in small government and has long been honest about what he wants to cut; at least he fully understands that continuing an empire with this level of debt is unsustainable and unconservative:

He will continue to be smeared by the more extreme neoconservatives precisely because they see his attempt to unwind an unsustainable neo-empire as an end to open-ended, unconditional support for an increasingly far right and fundamentalist Israel and an end to the PNAC global control ideology that is slowly corrupting this country and bankrupting its treasury. Why do we have thousands of troops in Germany and Japan for Pete's sake? If we can afford that but we cannot afford some basic health insurance for working poor Americans, something has gone seriously wrong.

He is not a cynical mannequin like Romney, nor a clinically disturbed fraud like Palin; nor an alleged moderate like Pawlenty now declaring that in government, "God is in charge!" He is real. He is sincere.

Which is why the pundits keep dismissing him. I don't.

The GOP could do a lot worse than nominating Paul. I’m sure that he has skeletons in his closet that could be exploited by the Democrats (see the newsletter controversy), but he was the only candidate in 2008 that was able to capture as much excitement as Obama so he cannot be dismissed.

In a related story, Glenn Beck was the keynote speaker this year and seemed to go after the Republicans as much as the Democrats.

From the story –

Republicans, he said, are just as guilty as Democrats. "It's not enough just to not suck as much as the other side," he said. "The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. I have not heard people in the Republican Party admit they have a problem and when I did hear them say they have a problem, I don't know if I believed them."

The Republicans' problem, he said, is the same as Democrats' problem -- an addiction to spending, a willingness to place the judgment of the government ahead of the rights of individuals, and an interest in picking winners and losers, with the winners being big banks and irresponsible corporations, and the losers being small businesses and individuals.

"As I read the Constitution, the only job the U.S. government has is to save us from bad guys," he said. "And right now it seems to me the government looks at us as the bad guy."

In addition to out-of-control spending and power-hungry politicians, Beck said the country's lack of international competitiveness is endangering the future of the economy. "The rest of the world is about to kick our butts. Why? Because we're not doing the things to make ourselves competitive," he said. "Economic holocaust is coming. I'm trying to get you to save your money. The worst is still ahead of us, but no one has the spine in Washington to tell you that because they don't think you can handle that."

Finally, Beck said that the country can avoid calamity if it returns to its roots as a democracy that embraces individual freedoms, allows people to succeed and fail on their own, and finds a way to live within its means.

"It is a hard road. I know. I've walked it myself," he said. "But we will make it. And when we put our head down on our pillow at night, we can be happy, because we know tomorrow it will be morning again in America."

A lot of people on the left laugh at Beck and call him all sorts of things, but I often wonder how many of them have actually listened to his show. That having been said, there is a lot of things that Beck says that I disagree with but I think that he is absolutely correct that we need to learn how to live within our means (I’m still working on this one myself).

Will anything come of this year’s CPAC? Who knows? We know that Mitt Romney’s CPAC victory in 2008 did nothing to help him win the GOP Presidential nomination and we also know that 2012 is a long way off. President Obama has plenty of time to turn things around in his favor and the GOP has plenty of time to mess their momentum up. Only time will tell.

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a 7 Seconds shuffle.

1. “Calendar” (from New Wind)
2. “Regress, No Way” (from Live: One Plus One)
3. “Straight On” (from The Crew)
4. “Our Core” (from Take It Back, Take It On, Take It Over!)
5. “My List” (from The Music, The Message)
6. “One Friend Too Many” (from Take It Back, Take It On, Take It Over!)
7. “This World of Mine” (from Good to Go)
8. “Out of Touch” (from Walk Together, Rock Together)
9. “4, 1, 4, 1…Done” (from Good to Go)
10. “Bully” (from The Crew)

What is My Mythology?

Joseph Campbell once said that people need to live with a mythology. This was an idea that he had learned from Carl Jung, who at one point had realized that he was living without a mythology and realized that he must find a mythology to live with (Campbell discussed this in an interview in The Hero’s Journey: A Biographical Portrait). Last night as I was laying in bed and listening to Rings, Swords, and Monsters: Exploring Fantasy Literature and I started thinking about my own mythology. What do I look to when thinking about the big questions of life, death, the soul, morality, ethics, and good vs. evil?

The more I think about it, the more I’ve realized that I don’t have one mythology. I don’t look to one faith or religion or philosophy for the answers to the great questions. I find those answers in everything from the works of Joseph Campbell to the music of U2 to the Star Wars films to the myths of antiquity to the fairy tales of our societies past to fantasy literature. Being a bit of a universalist, I am not beholden to one mythology and thus able to learn from the wisdom of all of them (or at least all of them that I am exposed to). By no means am I trying to say, imply, or suggest that this is superior to holding on to one faith or philosophy. The thing with faith and mythology is finding the one that is right for you.

We live in a beautiful and varied world that has produced a greatly vast ecosystem and diverse peoples. While we are all human and all have similar needs, wants, and desires, there is no way that one mythology, faith, religion, or philosophy can work for all of humanity. That is why the world has been blessed with so many different and exciting interpretations of the divine spirit that communicate the archetypes, morals, and virtues of our collective unconscious. And I believe that it doesn’t matter how you tap into the divine, just that you do.

Quote of the Day

"Giving laws, wanting improvements, making things easier, has all become wrong and evil. May each one seek out his own way, the way leads to mutual love in community. Men will come to see and feel the similarity and communality of their ways."

-- Carl Jung in 'The Red Book'

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a U2 shuffle.

1. “Until the End of the World” (from Achtung Baby)
2. “Scarlet” (from October)
3. “Kite” (from All That You Can’t Leave Behind)
4. “One” (from Achtung Baby)
5. “An Cat Dubh” (from Boy [Deluxe Edition] Disc 1)
6. “In a Little While” (from All That You Can’t Leave Behind)
7. “Fire” (from October)
8. “MLK” (from The Unforgettable Fire)
9. “Peace on Earth” (from All That You Can’t Leave Behind)
10. “A Day Without Me” (from Boy [Deluxe Edition] Disc 1)

Video of the Day

"Headache" by Frank Black

And Just in Case You Didn’t Already Know It…

Jay Leno is a jerk.

Thought Experiment

Dave over at Dave Town has proposed an excellent experiment --

Let us all, for Lent, do our usual analyzing of politics and current events, but (and this is the hard part) without ascribing motives to individuals.

For example, if the President, or Rush Limbaugh, or Simon Cowell (insert your favorite villain here) says something, try your hardest not to assume his intentions are evil and that he is trying single-handedly to bring down Western Civilization. Instead, use the energy you save by not hating him to thoughtfully analyze the substance of what he has said, and to come up with a reasonable alternative.

Currently Listening

1. “Running with Scissors” by Ben Lee (from Hey You, Yes You)
2. “On the Way Out” by The Copyrights (from Learn the Hard Way)
3. “Cruel World” by Dead To Me (from African Elephants)
4. “So Mixed Up” by Druglords of the Avenues (from Sing Songs)
5. “The Fear” by Lily Allen (from It’s Not Me, It’s You)
6. “Warning Device” by Teenage Bottlerocket (from Warning Device)
7. “Bar Woman Blues” by The Watson Twins (from Fire Songs)
8. “Big Shot” by Big Drill Car (from A Never Ending Endeavor)
9. “Bloodstains” by The Amazing Crowns (from Payback Live!)
10. “Career Opportunities” by The Clash (from The Clash)

Dr. Frank Collins: The Melding of Science and Faith

On Tuesday, Here & Now had a fascinating discussion with Dr. Frank Collins dealing with health, science, and faith. While listening to the show I knew nothing about Dr. Collins but was extremely impressed with him. So today I decided to see what I could find on the man and Google led me to a brilliant editorial that Dr. Collins wrote back in 2007 entitled Why this scientist believes in God.

From the story --

I had to admit that the science I loved so much was powerless to answer questions such as "What is the meaning of life?" "Why am I here?" "Why does mathematics work, anyway?" "If the universe had a beginning, who created it?" "Why are the physical constants in the universe so finely tuned to allow the possibility of complex life forms?" "Why do humans have a moral sense?" "What happens after we die?"

I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."

[...]

So, some have asked, doesn't your brain explode? Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God? Aren't evolution and faith in God incompatible? Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?

Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers. Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.

But why couldn't this be God's plan for creation? True, this is incompatible with an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, but long before Darwin, there were many thoughtful interpreters like St. Augustine, who found it impossible to be exactly sure what the meaning of that amazing creation story was supposed to be. So attaching oneself to such literal interpretations in the face of compelling scientific evidence pointing to the ancient age of Earth and the relatedness of living things by evolution seems neither wise nor necessary for the believer.

Here you have a scientist who has found the middle ground between the dogmas of science and faith.

Money Quote --

But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as with the mind. You have to hear the music, not just read the notes on the page. Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.

Why it is so hard for believers of both religion and science to see the value of the other is beyond me. I completely agree with Dr. Collins that science and religion are no in conflict with one another. They are simply telling the same story from different points of view.

JK Rowling Accused of Plagiarism

According to this story, Harry Potter author JK Rowling has been accused of stealing ideas that she used in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

From the story –

The 'Harry Potter' author has been added to the 2004 suit against her British publisher Bloomsbury, which claims Rowling stole the idea for the fourth book in the series -- 'Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire' -- from a 1987 children's novel, 'The Adventures of Willy the Wizard: No. 1 Livid Land,' by Adrian Jacobs.

"I am saddened that yet another claim has been made that I have taken material from another source to write Harry," Rowling said in a statement.

"The fact is, I had never heard of the author or the book before the first accusation by those connected to the author's estate in 2004; I have certainly never read the book," she added.

[...]

Jacobs' estate claims he came up with the ideas for wizard prisons, schools and hospitals -- all elements of Rowling's 'Potter' world.

I don’t know the specifics of this case and I highly doubt that Rowling stolen any ideas, but if they are making this case solely on the fact that Jacobs’ book had wizard prisons, schools, and hospitals, then that seems like a pretty darned flimsy claim to me. Because if that is all it takes to be considered a plagiarist then pretty much every author is up a creek.

Video of the Day

"You are a Space Alien" by Sicko

10 for 2010: U2

For my next installment of the 10 for 2010 series I’m tackling the band U2. So below are what I would consider my 10 favorite songs by U2 (along with links to videos) list in no particular order.

You can see Steve's version of this list here.

1. “Pride (In the Name of Love)” (from The Unforgettable Fire)
2. “The Electric Co.” (from Boy)
3. “Bad” (from The Unforgettable Fire)
4. “All I Want is You” (from Rattle & Hum)
5. “A Sort of Homecoming” (from The Unforgettable Fire)
6. “Running to Stand Still” (from The Joshua Tree)
7. “I Will Follow” (from Boy)
8. “Out of Control” (from Boy)
9. “Hawkmoon 269” (from Rattle & Hum)
10. “40” (from War)

Honorable Mentions –
“In God’s Country” (from The Joshua Tree)
“God Part II” (from Rattle & Hum)
“Gloria” (from October)
“Who’s Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses” (from Achtung Baby)
"The Fly" (from Achtung Baby)

Quote of the Day

This is the beginning of Lent. As a Catholic, one of the things I'll be repenting for is living in a civilization that treats this astonishing planet as something to be used rather than conserved. That the Christianist right, most markedly in its older generations, is more often than not allied with the destruction of God's creation or moronic denial of the severe stress it is under is one more example of how detached from Christianity so many of them have become. And that people who call themselves "conservative" seem to have such contempt for actual conservation is also a sign of how far the right has lost its soul.

-- Andrew Sullivan from the post Killing the Oceans

Racial Discrimination and the Tea Party Movement

I just finished watching Keith Olbermann’s President’s Day Special Comment (see video below) on racial discrimination and the Tea Party movement. While I don’t completely agree with Olbermann I can’t dismiss his analysis either. I truly think that the truth of the matter is somewhere between Olbermann and Glenn Beck (I just picked his name at random as someone in the media who is a supporter of the Tea Party movement). I think that there are plenty of people involved in the movement because they simply do not like President Obama’s policies and I think that there are some who, as Olbermann put it, “are afraid; terribly, painfully, cripplingly, blindingly afraid.”

Majority of Americans Oppose Supreme Court Campaign Finance Decision

According to a recent poll, the majority of Americans in both parties, “overwhelmingly oppose a Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations and unions to spend as much as they want on political campaigns, and most favor new limits on such spending.”

From the story –

Eight in 10 poll respondents say they oppose the high court's Jan. 21 decision to allow unfettered corporate political spending, with 65 percent "strongly" opposed. Nearly as many backed congressional action to curb the ruling, with 72 percent in favor of reinstating limits.

The poll reveals relatively little difference of opinion on the issue among Democrats (85 percent opposed to the ruling), Republicans (76 percent) and independents (81 percent).

Why does this not surprise me?

Sheezer – The All Female Weezer Cover Band

Hailing from Toronto, Sheezer is an all female Weezer cover band. According to Spinner.com, the band only cover’s music from Weezer’s first two albums –

"Everyone in the band loves those first two albums, but the output after that just didn't have the same... feeling. I'm not saying they're not good in their way, but those later albums just aren't the same for us. Sheezer is about us as much as it's about Weezer. It's an opportunity to turn up the amps and have fun, to play the kind of music we don't usually get to play."

Textbooks and the Founders

The blog Unreasonable Faith has an excellent post entitled The Founders in the Texas Textbooks that is a response/reaction to the NY Times article How Christian Were the Founders?.

The NY Times article begins by discussing this year’s petitioners to the Texas State Board of Education. Here is an early part that I think sets the tone for what’s to come –

Following the appeals from the public, the members of what is the most influential state board of education in the country, and one of the most politically conservative, submitted their own proposed changes to the new social-studies curriculum guidelines, whose adoption was the subject of all the attention — guidelines that will affect students around the country, from kindergarten to 12th grade, for the next 10 years. Gail Lowe — who publishes a twice-a-week newspaper when she is not grappling with divisive education issues — is the official chairwoman, but the meeting was dominated by another member. Don McLeroy, a small, vigorous man with a shiny pate and bristling mustache, proposed amendment after amendment on social issues to the document that teams of professional educators had drawn up over 12 months, in what would have to be described as a single-handed display of archconservative political strong-arming.

McLeroy moved that Margaret Sanger, the birth-control pioneer, be included because she “and her followers promoted eugenics,” that language be inserted about Ronald Reagan’s “leadership in restoring national confidence” following Jimmy Carter’s presidency and that students be instructed to “describe the causes and key organizations and individuals of the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.” The injection of partisan politics into education went so far that at one point another Republican board member burst out in seemingly embarrassed exasperation, “Guys, you’re rewriting history now!” Nevertheless, most of McLeroy’s proposed amendments passed by a show of hands.

Finally, the board considered an amendment to require students to evaluate the contributions of significant Americans. The names proposed included Thurgood Marshall, Billy Graham, Newt Gingrich, William F. Buckley Jr., Hillary Rodham Clinton and Edward Kennedy. All passed muster except Kennedy, who was voted down.

This is how history is made — or rather, how the hue and cry of the present and near past gets lodged into the long-term cultural memory or else is allowed to quietly fade into an inaudible whisper. Public education has always been a battleground between cultural forces; one reason that Texas’ school-board members find themselves at the very center of the battlefield is, not surprisingly, money. The state’s $22 billion education fund is among the largest educational endowments in the country. Texas uses some of that money to buy or distribute a staggering 48 million textbooks annually — which rather strongly inclines educational publishers to tailor their products to fit the standards dictated by the Lone Star State. California is the largest textbook market, but besides being bankrupt, it tends to be so specific about what kinds of information its students should learn that few other states follow its lead. Texas, on the other hand, was one of the first states to adopt statewide curriculum guidelines, back in 1998, and the guidelines it came up with (which are referred to as TEKS — pronounced “teaks” — for Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) were clear, broad and inclusive enough that many other states used them as a model in devising their own. And while technology is changing things, textbooks — printed or online —are still the backbone of education.

The cultural roots of the Texas showdown may be said to date to the late 1980s, when, in the wake of his failed presidential effort, the Rev. Pat Robertson founded the Christian Coalition partly on the logic that conservative Christians should focus their energies at the grass-roots level. One strategy was to put candidates forward for state and local school-board elections — Robertson’s protégé, Ralph Reed, once said, “I would rather have a thousand school-board members than one president and no school-board members” — and Texas was a beachhead. Since the election of two Christian conservatives in 2006, there are now seven on the Texas state board who are quite open about the fact that they vote in concert to advance a Christian agenda. “They do vote as a bloc,” Pat Hardy, a board member who considers herself a conservative Republican but who stands apart from the Christian faction, told me. “They work consciously to pull one more vote in with them on an issue so they’ll have a majority.”

Now that we have the stage set, the real matter is at hand…just how Christian were the Founding Fathers and how should that very topic be handled by history textbooks. More from the story --

The Christian “truth” about America’s founding has long been taught in Christian schools, but not beyond. Recently, however — perhaps out of ire at what they see as an aggressive, secular, liberal agenda in Washington and perhaps also because they sense an opening in the battle, a sudden weakness in the lines of the secularists — some activists decided that the time was right to try to reshape the history that children in public schools study. Succeeding at this would help them toward their ultimate goal of reshaping American society. As Cynthia Dunbar, another Christian activist on the Texas board, put it, “The philosophy of the classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of the government in the next.”

[...]

(T)he Christian bloc’s notion this year to bring Christianity into the coverage of American history is not, from their perspective, revisionism but rather an uncovering of truths that have been suppressed. “I don’t know that what we’re doing is redefining the role of religion in America,” says Gail Lowe, who became chairwoman of the board after McLeroy was ousted and who is one of the seven conservative Christians. “Many of us recognize that Judeo-Christian principles were the basis of our country and that many of our founding documents had a basis in Scripture. As we try to promote a better understanding of the Constitution, federalism, the separation of the branches of government, the basic rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, I think it will become evident to students that the founders had a religious motivation.”

Plenty of people disagree with this characterization of the founders, including some who are close to the process in Texas. “I think the evidence indicates that the founding fathers did not intend this to be a Christian nation,” says James Kracht, who served as an expert adviser to the board in the textbook-review process. “They definitely believed in some form of separation of church and state.”

There is, however, one slightly awkward issue for hard-core secularists who would combat what they see as a Christian whitewashing of American history: the Christian activists have a certain amount of history on their side.

IN 1801, A GROUP of Baptist ministers in Danbury, Conn., wrote a letter to the new president, Thomas Jefferson, congratulating him on his victory. They also had a favor to ask. Baptists were a minority group, and they felt insecure. In the colonial period, there were two major Christian factions, both of which derived from England. The Congregationalists, in New England, had evolved from the Puritan settlers, and in the South and middle colonies, the Anglicans came from the Church of England. Nine colonies developed state churches, which were supported financially by the colonial governments and whose power was woven in with that of the governments. Other Christians — Lutherans, Baptists, Quakers — and, of course, those of other faiths were made unwelcome, if not persecuted outright.

There was a religious element to the American Revolution, which was so pronounced that you could just as well view the event in religious as in political terms. Many of the founders, especially the Southerners, were rebelling simultaneously against state-church oppression and English rule. The Connecticut Baptists saw Jefferson — an anti-Federalist who was bitterly opposed to the idea of establishment churches — as a friend. “Our constitution of government,” they wrote, “is not specific” with regard to a guarantee of religious freedoms that would protect them. Might the president offer some thoughts that, “like the radiant beams of the sun,” would shed light on the intent of the framers? In his reply, Jefferson said it was not the place of the president to involve himself in religion, and he expressed his belief that the First Amendment’s clauses — that the government must not establish a state religion (the so-called establishment clause) but also that it must ensure the free exercise of religion (what became known as the free-exercise clause) — meant, as far as he was concerned, that there was “a wall of separation between Church & State.”

This little episode, culminating in the famous “wall of separation” metaphor, highlights a number of points about teaching religion in American history. For one, it suggests — as the Christian activists maintain — how thoroughly the colonies were shot through with religion and how basic religion was to the cause of the revolutionaries. The period in the early- to mid-1700s, called the Great Awakening, in which populist evangelical preachers challenged the major denominations, is considered a spark for the Revolution. And if religion influenced democracy then, in the Second Great Awakening, decades later, the democratic fervor of the Revolution spread through the two mainline denominations and resulted in a massive growth of the sort of populist churches that typify American Christianity to this day.

So here we have the brunt of the basic disagreement between these two factions. One group seems to believe that the Founders intended to design a Christian nation and the other group believes that the Founders intended to design a secular nation. I think that it is safe to say the truth is probably somewhere in-between. I do believe that the Founders, whether intentionally or not, created America as a secular nation but it was a secular nation that has very, very strong roots in Judea-Christian philosophies, values, and beliefs; equally though there are strong roots in our countries foundation that come from the Enlightenment. To be fair and balanced to history, our Founding Fathers, and our children, all of these elements should be included in the history textbooks. But sadly that’s not what happens or has ever really happened –

Some conservatives claim that earlier generations of textbooks were frank in promoting America as a Christian nation. It might be more accurate to say that textbooks of previous eras portrayed leaders as generally noble, with strong personal narratives, undergirded by faith and patriotism. As Frances FitzGerald showed in her groundbreaking 1979 book “America Revised,” if there is one thing to be said about American-history textbooks through the ages it is that the narrative of the past is consistently reshaped by present-day forces. Maybe the most striking thing about current history textbooks is that they have lost a controlling narrative. America is no longer portrayed as one thing, one people, but rather a hodgepodge of issues and minorities, forces and struggles. If it were possible to cast the concerns of the Christian conservatives into secular terms, it might be said that they find this lack of a through line and purpose to be disturbing and dangerous. Many others do as well, of course.

Some of the recommendations to the Texas Board were pretty staggering IMHO. I’m trying really hard to not copy too much of this story but some sections just speak for themselves better than my recounting could. Like the following --

Marshall also proposed that children be taught that the separation-of-powers notion is “rooted in the Founding Fathers’ clear understanding of the sinfulness of man,” so that it was not safe for one person to exercise unlimited power, and that “the discovery, settling and founding of the colonies happened because of the biblical worldviews of those involved.” Marshall recommended that textbooks present America’s founding and history in terms of motivational stories on themes like the Pilgrims’ zeal to bring the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the natives.

One recurring theme during the process of revising the social-studies guidelines was the desire of the board to stress the concept of American exceptionalism, and the Christian bloc has repeatedly emphasized that Christianity should be portrayed as the driving force behind what makes America great. Peter Marshall is himself the author of a series of books that recount American history with a strong Christian focus and that have been staples in Christian schools since the first one was published in 1977. (He told me that they have sold more than a million copies.) In these history books, he employs a decidedly unhistorical tone in which the guiding hand of Providence shapes America’s story, starting with the voyage of Christopher Columbus. “Columbus’s heart belonged to God,” he assures his readers, and he notes that a particular event in the explorer’s life “marked the turning point of God’s plan to use Columbus to raise the curtain on His new Promised Land.”

The other nonacademic expert, David Barton, is the nationally known leader of WallBuilders, which describes itself as dedicated to “presenting America’s forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on our moral, religious and constitutional heritage.” Barton has written and lectured on the First Amendment and against separation of church and state. He is a controversial figure who has argued that the U.S. income tax and the capital-gains tax should be abolished because they violate Scripture (for the Bible says, in Barton’s reading, “the more profit you make the more you are rewarded”) and who pushes a Christianity-first rhetoric. When the U.S. Senate invited a Hindu leader to open a 2007 session with a prayer, he objected, saying: “In Hindu [sic], you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods. And certainly that was never in the minds of those who did the Constitution, did the Declaration when they talked about Creator.”

In his recommendations to the Texas school board, Barton wrote that students should be taught the following principles which, in his reading, derive directly from the Declaration of Independence: “1. There is a fixed moral law derived from God and nature. 2. There is a Creator. 3. The Creator gives to man certain unalienable rights. 4. Government exists primarily to protect God-given rights to every individual. 5. Below God-given rights and moral laws, government is directed by the consent of the governed.”

A third expert, Daniel L. Dreisbach, a professor of justice, law and society at American University who has written extensively on First Amendment issues, stressed, in his recommendations to the guideline writers about how to frame the revolutionary period for students, that the founders were overwhelmingly Christian; that the deistic tendencies of a few — like Jefferson — were an anomaly; and that most Americans in the era were not just Christians but that “98 percent or more of Americans of European descent identified with Protestantism.”

Those recommendations are so one-sided and biased that it is mind boggling. But back to the basic argument at hand… It seems that the biggest point of contention is the idea of the separation of church and state --

If the fight between the “Christian nation” advocates and mainstream thinkers could be focused onto a single element, it would be the “wall of separation” phrase. Christian thinkers like to point out that it does not appear in the Constitution, nor in any other legal document — letters that presidents write to their supporters are not legal decrees. Besides which, after the phrase left Jefferson’s pen it more or less disappeared for a century and a half — until Justice Hugo Black of the Supreme Court dug it out of history’s dustbin in 1947. It then slowly worked its way into the American lexicon and American life, helping to subtly mold the way we think about religion in society. To conservative Christians, there is no separation of church and state, and there never was. The concept, they say, is a modern secular fiction. There is no legal justification, therefore, for disallowing crucifixes in government buildings or school prayer.

David Barton reads the “church and state” letter to mean that Jefferson “believed, along with the other founders, that the First Amendment had been enacted only to prevent the federal establishment of a national denomination.” Barton goes on to claim, “ ‘Separation of church and state’ currently means almost exactly the opposite of what it originally meant.” That is to say, the founders were all Christians who conceived of a nation of Christians, and the purpose of the First Amendment was merely to ensure that no single Christian denomination be elevated to the role of state church.

Mainstream scholars disagree, sometimes vehemently. Randall Balmer, a professor of American religious history at Barnard College and writer of the documentary “Crusade: The Life of Billy Graham,” told me: “David Barton has been out there spreading this lie, frankly, that the founders intended America to be a Christian nation. He’s been very effective. But the logic is utterly screwy. He says the phrase ‘separation of church and state’ is not in the Constitution. He’s right about that. But to make that argument work you would have to argue that the phrase is not an accurate summation of the First Amendment. And Thomas Jefferson, who penned it, thought it was.” (David Barton declined to be interviewed for this article.) In his testimony in Austin, Steven Green was challenged by a board member with the fact that the phrase does not appear in the Constitution. In response, Green pointed out that many constitutional concepts — like judicial review and separation of powers — are not found verbatim in the Constitution.

Let us not forget that Thomas Jefferson was not only the author of the Declaration of Independence but also the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom. And like I said earlier the Founders were rooted in Christianity and the Enlightenment (emphasis mine) --

In fact, the founders were rooted in Christianity — they were inheritors of the entire European Christian tradition — and at the same time they were steeped in an Enlightenment rationalism that was, if not opposed to religion, determined to establish separate spheres for faith and reason. “I don’t think the founders would have said they were applying Christian principles to government,” says Richard Brookhiser, the conservative columnist and author of books on Alexander Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris and George Washington. “What they said was ‘the laws of nature and nature’s God.’ They didn’t say, ‘We put our faith in Jesus Christ.’ ” Martin Marty says: “They had to invent a new, broad way. Washington, in his writings, makes scores of different references to God, but not one is biblical. He talks instead about a ‘Grand Architect,’ deliberately avoiding the Christian terms, because it had to be a religious language that was accessible to all people.”

Or, as Brookhiser rather succinctly summarizes the point: “The founders were not as Christian as those people would like them to be, though they weren’t as secularist as Christopher Hitchens would like them to be.”

This now brings us to the post at Unreasonable Faith. This is a blog that is run by atheists but I think that their reaction to this article was a balanced one. From the post (again, emphasis mine) --

The article is fairly even handed, and it makes the point that secularists often ignore just how religious many of the early Americans were. America is steeped in Christianity, and many of the first people to establish communities here had explicitly apocalyptic motives. This would be the City on a Hill, whose purity would act as a beacon for the rest of the world. American righteousness would be like the leaven that spreads to all parts of the globe, and once the world is made righteous then Christ would return.

We tend to skip over much of this in our schools. Religion is inherently controversial, and textbooks publisher prefer to avoid controversy. Secularists would prefer to avoid the religious agendas of many of the first generations. However, the conservative Christians would prefer to avoid discussion of all the freethinkers, religious eccentrics and iconoclasts that came over here. Jefferson, Roger Williams, Thomas Paine and all the rest. Restless minds who constantly questioned and rejected received wisdom.

[...]

But really, all of this is a side issue. Even if the founding generation were all Evangelical Christians to a man (and woman), the document they left us that acts as the cornerstone of our government is a secular one. The founders were a diverse lot and their religious ideas varied from person to person (and in Jefferson’s case, moment to moment.) We’re not going to get anywhere by arguing about whether Patrick Henry’s Christianity cancels out Jefferson’s unitarianism.

A Christian might well support a secular government for religious reasons. For example, Jefferson believed that absolute religious freedom would lead to the evolution and eventual perfection of religion. An atheist might support a religious government, since churches are often seen as the promoters of good social order. So arguing about who was what and when doesn’t help the discussion.

The American Constitution is not a confessionally Christian document. According to Madison’s notes, the framers did not discuss biblical justification or Christian theology while creating it. The legitimacy of the American government is based on the will of the people rather than by divine appointment. This is the central fact that the discussion must start from. Anything else is just a distraction.

Those are some passionate and sound arguments that I think are pretty spot on. While I agree with Jefferson that the laws of nature and our inalienable rights come from divine providence, I also agree that the American government is based on the will of the people (in theory at least) and the rule of law. We are a Republic that balances the will of the masses with the rights of the individual and minority and sometimes we falter but overall I think that our country has done better than any other in promoting liberty and freedom and that is something that we should all be able to agree on.

Losing My Passion

A few months ago I made a decision/realization that I am probably never going to finish college due to my desperate need to find a new job. Ever since then I’ve been in a bit of a daze. My fuse is exceptionally short and I seem to have lost my passion. I still enjoy the same things but I don’t really care all that much any more. In fact I really don’t care all that much about anything. Basically I’m going through the motions but I do seem to be angry all of the time. I’m losing my empathy and sympathy for others and I hate it. I’ve also noticed that the quality of my blogging has diminished, despite the fact that I keep spitting out posts on a nearly daily basis.

I don’t want to be a dried up, bitter person but I don’t how to get my center and soul back on course.

Currently Listening

Today we’re doing a Street Dogs shuffle.

1. “Kevin J. O’Toole” (from State of Grace)
2. “Cut Down on the 12th” (from Savin’ Hill)
3. “Tales of Mass Deception” (from Back to the World)
4. “Mean Fist” (from State of Grace)
5. “Pull the Pin” (from Back to the World)
6. “White Collar Fraud” (from Back to the World)
7. “Patrick” (from Back to the World)
8. “A State of Grace” (from State of Grace)
9. “Common People” (from Fading American Dream)
10. “The Pilgrim: Chapter 33” (from Savin’ Hill)

Cover Wars -- "Fortunate Son"

Creedence Clearwater Revival vs. Dropkick Murphys





My Vote: Dropkick Murphys

Should Dick Cheney Be Tried as a War Criminal for His Part in Condoning Torture Via Waterboarding?

Andrew Sullivan thinks so and argues a pretty good case for it.

Money Quote –

The question is therefore not if, but when, he is convicted as a war criminal - in his lifetime or posthumously.

In fact, the attorney general of the United States is legally obliged to prosecute someone who has openly admitted such a war crime or be in violation of the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention on Torture. For Eric Holder to ignore this duty subjects him too to prosecution. If the US government fails to enforce the provision against torture, the UN or a foreign court can initiate an investigation and prosecution.

These are not my opinions and they are not hyperbole. They are legal facts. Either this country is governed by the rule of law or it isn't. Cheney's clear admission of his central role in authorizing waterboarding and the clear evidence that such waterboarding did indeed take place means that prosecution must proceed.

Cheney himself just set in motion a chain of events that the civilized world must see to its conclusion or cease to be the civilized world. For such a high official to escape the clear letter of these treaties and conventions, and to openly brag of it, renders such treaties and conventions meaningless.

Quote of the Day II

What saddens me about this debate is that this is an issue where genuine conservatives--meaning those who actually wish to conserve something--should be the leaders and not the deniers. Reverence for the natural order is conservative, or else "conservatism" means nothing at all. The idea that our God-given dominion over the natural order can be expressed as a tyranny, as a bending of nature to our will, no matter how mis-directed that will is, strikes not just at the natural order, but at the moral order as well.

-- John Médaille (from the post About Those "32,000 Skeptical Scientists...")

Quote of the Day

One would hope that in the "Information Age," there would actually be more information. And there is. The problem is that there is also more disinformation, and better means of disseminating it. Those who are well-organized and well-funded can easily spread out-right lies long before the truth has a chance to catch up.

-- John Médaille (from the post About Those "32,000 Skeptical Scientists...")

The Tyranny of Dreams

Classically Liberal has an excellent post entitled The tyranny of dreams that well worth reading. Here is the opening paragraph just to give you a taste –

It is often said that the free society, as envisioned by passionate libertarians, is insufficient to take care of the needs of the poor and vulnerable. Often this point is driven home by someone comparing an ideal socialist society, where all personal agendas and politics have vanished, to the harsher reality of modern society. In other words, they compare an ideal, unrestricted by reality, to how things actually are. In such a comparison between fantasy and reality, reality will always loose.

The is much about the utopian dreams that I agree with but I want people to get to that place because they think it is the right thing to do, not because the government forces them to.

Currently Listening

1. “Fat Bottomed Girls” by Queen (from Greatest Hits [We Will Rock You Edition])
2. “Belong” by R.E.M. (from MTV Unplugged)
3. “Let of the Dial” by The Replacements (from Tim [Expanded Edition])
4. “Mr. Pitiful” by Otis Redding (from The Definitive Soul Collection Disc 1)
5. “Rights to Your Soul” by Street Dogs (from Fading American Dream)
6. “On My Own” by Teenage Bottlerocket (from Warning Device)
7. “I Would Die 4 U” by Prince & the Revolution (from Purple Rain)
8. “Walk on the Wild Side” by Lou Reed (from Walk on the Wild Side: The Best of Lou Reed)
9. “So Mixed Up” by Druglords of the Avenues (from Sing Songs)
10. “Punk Rock Teeth” by 7 Seconds (from The Music, The Message)

Revisiting the Philosophical Health Check

I took this test back in 2006 and got a 40% and today I got a 33%.

Here is some info about the test itself –

The Philosophical Health Check is designed to identify tensions or contradictions (a Tension Quotient) between various beliefs that you have. The PHC does not aim to identify which of your beliefs are true or false, but where the set of beliefs you hold may not be compatible with each other.

The PHC report below lists pairs of beliefs which are identified as being 'in tension'. What this means is either that: (1) There is a contradiction between the two beliefs or (2) Some sophisticated reasoning is required to enable both beliefs to be held consistently. In terms of action, this means in each case you should either (1) Give up one of the two beliefs or (2) Find some rationally coherent way of reconciling them.

It may help to think of the idea of 'tension' in terms of an intellectual balancing act. Where there is little or no tension between beliefs, little intellectual effort is required to balance both beliefs. But where there is a lot of tension, either one has to 'jump off the tightrope', by abandoning one belief; maintain one's balance by intellectual effort and dexterity; or else 'fall off the tightrope' by failing to reconcile the tension and holding contradictory beliefs.

This test only detects tensions between pre-selected pairs of beliefs - it does not detect all the possible tensions between all permutations of beliefs. So there may well be additional tensions between beliefs you hold which are not detected by the test.

[...]

Questions 10 and 23: Is there an all-good, all-powerful God?

48996 of the 153243 people who have completed this activity have this tension in their beliefs.

You agreed that:
There exists an all-powerful, loving and good God
And also that:
To allow an innocent child to suffer needlessly when one could easily prevent it is morally reprehensible

These two beliefs together generate what is known as 'The Problem of Evil'. The problem is simple: if God is all-powerful, loving and good, that means he can do what he wants and will do what is morally right. But surely this means that he would not allow an innocent child to suffer needlessly, as he could easily prevent it. Yet he does. Much infant suffering is the result of human action, but much is also due to natural causes, such as disease, flood or famine. In both cases, God could stop it, yet he does not.

Attempts to explain this apparent contradiction are known as 'theodicies' and many have been produced. Most conclude that God allows suffering to help us grow spiritually and/or to allow the greater good of human freedom. Whether these theodicies are adequate is the subject of continuing debate.


Questions 24 and 3: How much must I protect the environment?

72920 of the 153243 people who have completed this activity have this tension in their beliefs.

You agreed that:
The environment should not be damaged unnecessarily in the pursuit of human ends
But disagreed that:
People should not journey by car if they can walk, cycle or take a train instead

As walking, cycling and taking the train are all less environmentally damaging than driving a car for the same journey, if you choose to drive when you could have used another mode of transport, you are guilty of unnecessarily damaging the environment.

The problem here is the word 'unnecessary'. Very few things are necessary, if by necessary it is meant essential to survival. But you might want to argue that much of your use of cars or aeroplanes is necessary, not for survival, but for a certain quality
of life. The difficulty is that the consequence of this response is that it then becomes hard to be critical of others, for it seems that 'necessary' simply means what one judges to be important for oneself. A single plane journey may add more pollutants to the atmosphere than a year's use of a high-emission vehicle. Who is guilty of causing unnecessary environmental harm here?


Questions 22 and 15: What is the seat of the self?

47962 of the 153243 people who have completed this activity have this tension in their beliefs.

You agreed that:
Severe brain-damage can rob a person of all consciousness and selfhood
And also that:
On bodily death, a person continues to exist in a non-physical form

These two beliefs are not strictly contradictory, but they do present an awkward mix of world-views. On the one hand, there is an acceptance that our consciousness and sense of self is in some way dependent on brain activity, and this is why brain damage can in a real sense damage 'the self'. Yet there is also the belief that the self is somehow independent of the body, that it can live on after the death of the brain. So it seems consciousness and selfhood both is and is not dependent on having a healthy brain. One could argue that the dependency of the self on brain only occurs before bodily death. The deeper problem is not that it is impossible to reconcile the two beliefs, but rather that they seem to presume wider, contradictory world-views: one where consciousness is caused by brains and one where it is caused by something non-physical.


Questions 14 and 25: How do we judge art?

70287 of the 153243 people who have completed this activity have this tension in their beliefs.

You agreed that:
Judgements about works of art are purely matters of taste
And also that:
Michaelangelo is one of history's finest artists

The tension here is the result of the fact that you probably don't believe the status of Michaelangelo is seriously in doubt. One can disagree about who is the best artist of all time, but surely Michaelangelo is on the short list. Yet if this is true, how can judgements about works of art be purely matters of taste? If someone unskilled were to claim that they were as good an artist as Michaelangelo, you would probably think that they were wrong, and not just because your tastes differ. You would probably think Michaelangelo's superiority to be not just a matter of personal opinion. The tension here is between a belief that works of art can be judged, in certain respects, by some reasonably objective standards and the belief that, nonetheless, the final arbiter of taste is something subjective. This is not a contradiction, but a tension nonetheless.


Questions 16 and 21: What should be legal?

62855 of the 153243 people who have completed this activity have this tension in their beliefs.

You agreed that:
The government should not permit the sale of treatments which have not been tested for efficacy and safety
And also that:
Alternative and complementary medicine is as valuable as mainstream medicine

But most alternative and complementary medicines have not been tested in trials as rigorously as 'conventional' medicine. For example, the popular herbal anti-depressant, St John's Wort, has recently been found to cause complications when taken alongside any of five other common medicines. This has only come to light because of extensive testing. Yet the product is freely available without medical advice. The question that needs answering here is, why do you believe alternative medicines and treatments need not be as extensively tested as conventional ones? The fact that they use natural ingredients is not in itself good reason, as there are plenty of naturally occurring toxins. Even if one argues that their long history shows them to be safe, that is not the same as showing them to be effective. This is not to criticise alternative therapies, but to question the different standards which are used to judge them compared to mainstream medicines.