In which George W. Bush proves he is a gentleman, even if he did do most other things wrong
McCain, AGAIN?
How to annoy two hundred million voters in one easy step
My version of campaign finance reform
Colbert was the distraction
Mexicans here before America was even an idea?
Demand "None Of The Above"
About the O'Donnell witchcraft thing
This is a page from the original version of Pagan Vigil. There are some formatting differences. Originally published at www.paganvigil.com/C127135145/E20100920142330
About the O'Donnell witchcraft thing
What does it say about Bill Maer? - updated
The story is not that Christine O'Donnell dabbled in witchcraft during high school and decided it wasn't for her. Regardless of your personal beliefs, it's still about personal choice and personal responsibility. O'Donnell made her choice.
No, the story is that Bill Maher is okay with witchcraft until he can use it to embarrass someone who doesn't share his politics.
Think very carefully about the implications of that.
Maher exemplifies a certain liberal/progressive mindset. According to the "grand accepted wisdom," minorities are okay as long as they do what they are told and don't get in the way of their betters. In my experience, that extends to minority faiths. We're supposed to be on call for the dog and pony shows, but not to make too much fuss otherwise.
And if you think I'm off base, go watch some more of Maher's show.
For extra credit, see how many other high profile media liberals share the same attitudes.
Oh, Jason Pitzl-Waters of the Wild Hunt Blog gives his opinion here, and does a roundup of Pagan reactions here.
Update - I left out one word and implied that I knew O'Donnell. I don't, and up until this mess I hadn't followed the Delaware race. Blame it on chronic insomnia and limited time. My fingers don't always keep up with my brain, and I overlook typos when I am rushed.
Posted: Mon - September 20, 2010 at 02:23 PM
The “Tea Party” scares the political leadership
This is a page from the original version of Pagan Vigil. There are some formatting differences. Originally published at www.paganvigil.com/C127135145/E20100920121432
The “Tea Party” scares the political leadership
Something they can't control, even if it's not enough to take control away
““The issue isn't whether "the" Tea Party will do those things. The Tea Party isn't an actual party; it's an extremely decentralized movement with room for several different points of view. It is not libertarian in itself, but it has opened a space for libertarian ideas; it includes good guys like the Campaign for Liberty, and it includes its share of scamsters and authoritarians as well. And it includes a lot of people who are not pure libertarians but are motivated by a libertarian take on one or more pressing issues.””
My take is that the various Tea Parties scare the daylights out of the existing political parties because they are a bottom up movement instead of a top down organization. They don't take their "marching orders" from anyone except themselves. That's exactly opposite of how protests have been organized for the last thirty or forty years.
It's the politics of the everyman, not necessarily tied to election cycles.
The Republican leadership believes it can be subverted because they did it before. You may not remember the "Republican Revolution" in the 1994 midterm elections. When the newly minted members of Congress took their seats, the wheeling and dealing began. There was no way those freshmen Congressmen and Senators would get committee assignments unless they toed the line. The institutions of Congress and the political parties were designed to seduced and subvert anyone who might make change. That is exactly what happened.
This could be different. And I really stress that "could be." If people accept that the real change is only going to happen if they are involved and watching closely, then yes, it could get better.
Otherwise we're waiting for the system to collapse. And when the government starts spending more on debt service than anything else, it won't take long.
They established institutions of both major parties aren't interested in reform, they want power. Even if every candidate elected for the next three national elections was a "Tea Party" candidate, it wouldn't be enough to stem the tide. The only way the party leadership will accept reform is if they are running scared.
Posted: Mon - September 20, 2010 at 12:14 PM
Government insanity
Stop me if you've heard this one about the IRS Andover facility
This is a page from the original version of Pagan Vigil. There are some formatting differences. Originally published at www.paganvigil.com/C127135145/E20100905130903
Stop me if you've heard this one about the IRS Andover facility
Congresscritters pressure the IRS to waste your money to keep tax parasites employed. I know that is harsh but that is exactly what is happening.
However, here are the facts.
The Andover IRS facility was slated to be closed, under pressure from the New England Congresscritters, that is no longer true.
The renovation of the Andover facility focuses on frills.
Representative Tsongas did suggest that the 1400 IRS employees slated to be laid off be used in make work programs.
So, let's summarize. The IRS was scheduled to shut down a processing facility and lay off the workers. Under political pressure from a few Congress people (not a vote of Congress, but simply a handful of politicos throwing their weight around), the shut down was delayed and the workers were given make work because keeping Federal agents employed is more important than the private free market. Meanwhile, the building is undergoing a lavish refurbishment.
So the FedGovs are renovating a building housing employees doing makework but whose main job is to collect and process taxes so the Federal government can operate…
…spending money keeping unneeded government employees in a newly upgraded facility.
We've crossed a line.
We're now paying government agents to collect money for their own employment in a very fancy building that is being renovated by that same money.
It's hard NOT to be anti-government after reading the stories for all of that.
Posted: Sun - September 5, 2010 at 01:09 PM
Response to my Ebert entry
Rogert Ebert wants critics of Obama to "Put up or shut up"
This is a page from the original version of Pagan Vigil. There are some formatting differences. Originally published at www.paganvigil.com/C127135145/E20100903114934
Rogert Ebert wants critics of Obama to "Put up or shut up"
Funny how that only works if there is a liberal President
Here's the thing. Just because someone happens to be President doesn't mean that he shouldn't be criticized. He should be. Loudly. Publicly.
But for pity's sake pick the battles.
The fact is that there are those who lambast both Glenn Beck and Barak Obama (all hail the Imperious Leader, may his toenails never shrink!).
If it were a Republican President, Ebert would be at the head of the pack criticizing him. Oh wait, that already happened. Numerous times.
Sometimes I really hate being proven right again and again.
Now that it's "their guy," liberals like Ebert don't want anyone criticizing the President. And they will go out of their way to paint the most public opposition as "nuts."
Just like happened with conservatives and Bush.
Me, I say that the problems start because government tries to control too much of your life.
Yes, elected officials should be criticized. Loudly. Especially if they break their own rules and promises.
And if that doesn't work, just remember that the rule of law works both ways. If the "elite" won't abide by it, there is no reason you have to submit.
Posted: Fri - September 3, 2010 at 11:49 AM
Expanding civilizations, religions, and faith
Expanding civilizations, religions, and faith
Except for a few central issues, I really try not to tread on people's beliefs. I don't have time for one thing.
But every once in a while, something comes up that is just too silly.
David Warren was writing about the Gulf oil mess and rules and regulations. He made some great points about the limits of government ability. But then he tossed in this tidbit.
❝❝I like to dwell on the wisdom of our ancestors. It took us millennia to emerge from the primitive notion that a malignant agency must lie behind every unfortunate experience. Indeed, the Catholic Church spent centuries fighting folk pagan beliefs in things like evil fairies, and the whole notion the Devil can compel any person to act against his will -- only to watch an explosion of witch-hunting and related popular hysterias at the time of the Reformation.
In so many ways, the trend of post-Christian society today is back to pagan superstitions: to the belief that malice lies behind every misfortune, and to the related idea that various, essentially pagan charms can be used to ward off that to which all flesh is heir. The belief that, for instance, laws can be passed, that change the entire order of nature, is among the most irrational of these.❞❞
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the "triumph" of Christianity actually cost European civilization science, wealth, and much of what made life good.
This has nothing to do with the merits of Paganism or the faults of Christianity.
That's important. Read it again.
And yes, I know that paganism wasn't Paganism as we recognize it today. That's not the point. Nor is it important which had better beliefs or more superstitions.
It's one of my working theories. Cultures and civilizations expand when they have trade, immigration, and tolerance. Without trade, immigration, and tolerance, cultures contract and become more insular.
It's a generally accepted flexibility of thought that makes trade, immigration, and tolerance possible. The more trade, immigration, and tolerance there is, the more vibrant and interesting the culture becomes. You never know what will cross pollinate or what will take root where.
Thanks to Constantine, Christianity went from several competing groups to one ruled by a Church and an Emperor. Dissent was ruthlessly suppressed. Variations from the cultural norms were destroyed. This isn't inherent in Christianity, but it was inherent in the Christian belief system that the Council of Nicea propagated.
Believe me, there are forms of paganism that are just as intolerant. And oddly enough, those also retreated into themselves.
How we treat the Other may well be the defining characteristic of a great human civilization.
And then we get Stephen Hawking. Yes, that Stephen Hawking.
❝❝There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, [and] science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works.❞❞
Two tiny little problems there. Religion does work for many people, but not necessarily because of authority. Faith works for many more, and not necessarily because of authority.
And the other problem. Well, it's hardly worth mentioning, but science is the bastard child of magick.
Oops! I revealed an untold truth!!
Religion, faith, and the desire to control or at least predict the universe led to science. In many ways, they still intertwine.
Just something for you to think about on this Wednesday.
In so many ways, the trend of post-Christian society today is back to pagan superstitions: to the belief that malice lies behind every misfortune, and to the related idea that various, essentially pagan charms can be used to ward off that to which all flesh is heir. The belief that, for instance, laws can be passed, that change the entire order of nature, is among the most irrational of these.❞❞
Posted: Wed - June 9, 2010 at 02:02 PM Morality & Modern Life