The Exercise of Vital Powers

From the comments at ProfessorBainBridge.com:

Winston Churchill called democracy the worst form of government except for every other form available.

The Republicans are the worst political party except for every other party that has a chance of winning elections.

Given the loony stance of the LP on key issues, I’d say “except for every other party”.

“What the American people have seen is this incredible disparity in which those people who had cars and money got out and those people who were impoverished, drowned.”
– Ted Kennedy on Hurricane Katrina

“Ditto”
– Mary Jo Kopechne

Hat tip: Greg Howard

“The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools.” - Thucydides

Good defense of ROTC here.

From Tech Central Station (link):

How important on a man’s list of values is being right about the theory of the development of species? If you are a biologist, it might matter to you passionately; but if you are a farmer trying to raise your kids to be good people, it will matter far more to you what their basic metaphors about the universe will be.

That is a valid point. However when that kid is sitting in Biology class, they are being taught about how life works not where it came from. In the case of Creationism, Intelligent Design or the The Flying Spaghetti Monster, it is not the study of how life works and therefore should be in a more appropriate venue, like philosophy class - something that would probably be far more useful than the crap that passes for public school curriculum these days.

What amazes me are the people who honestly believe that the Bible is the word of God. I’ve actually heard people say “If the King James Version was good enough for Jesus, its good enough for me”. Beyond the various political machinations involved with the multiple translations of the Gospels from the original Aramaic, Greek or Hebrew into Latin, then in the 1600s into English, what makes people think that what God told us two to five thousand years ago still pertains to modern life? Consider:

You have a small child, perhaps 4 years old. He asks: “Daddy, where do babies come from?”. How do you answer?
“Well son, first a man’s penis get erect, then he sticks it into the woman’s vagina…..” or “They are delivered by storks”?

You’ll probably go with something along the lines of the latter version. Your child is too young to understand the full significances of the truth. As they get older you will (hopefully) teach them the truth. The Stork is a metaphor.

Now, engage in some blasphemy with me:
You are God. Your creations, the humans, ask “where did we come from?” - now back when humans were first asking God this question, we weren’t much more advanced than the four year old. We thought the world was flat (”Gosh, gee it sure looks it”), had no knowledge of basic chemistry, biology, DNA, or the existence of extinct species. If you were God, which explanation would you offer:
1) “Well you see, there are these microscopic molecules inside each of your cells called Deoxyribonucleic acid. In those molecules are the basic instructions for building your body…”
or
2) “Well, on the 6th day I created you in my image”

God told us a message that was appropriate to our stage of development as a species. God also gave us brains. Big ones. Brains big enough to figure out that the Earth actually revolves around the Sun, that if you mix green and yellow peas 25% of the time you get yellow peas, that there are microscopic molecules inside each of your cells called Deoxyribonucleic acid, and that different species change over time due to changes in their environment.

We don’t need God to tell us that the world wasn’t created in 6 days. He gave us the tools to figure it out ourselves! And I suspect he is quite peeved we are too stubborn not to accept it.

This way of thinking applies to other things God has “told us”. For example, assuming the KJV is the actual word of God, he said:

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Leviticus 20:13.

Now, if you are the benefactor of a tribe of people trying to eek out an existence on a barren plain of land, telling your people to have babies when they have sex makes a lot of sense. There are famines, hostile tribes, disease, and the occasional 40 day flood they have to contend with. You need to keep up the population of the tribe.

Of course some four thousand years latter there are 6.5 billion of us running around, a large portion of those are malnourished, we are making good progress on the disease front, and most of the hostile tribes are making the stuff that goes into our Wal-marts. Perhaps, just perhaps, Leviticus 20:13 doesn’t apply anymore.

But you counter, “God hasn’t told us it doesn’t apply anymore”.

But has he? Just like with God getting us to use our big fat brains to figure out the world wasn’t created in six days, perhaps he doesn’t need to use burning bushes and turning people into salt. We are older now, God can be more subtle.

Perhaps he is sending a message when a prominent conservative politician’s daughter, whom he loves dearly, tells him that she is gay.

All I’m saying is lets keep an open mind about what God wants. He made us smart. He knew what he was getting into. Lets not insult him by remaining the equlivant of that four year old as a species.

Who said:

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.”

Was it:
a) George Bush in an Address to the nation
b) Colin Powell before the United Nations
c) Tony Blair before the British Parliment
d) Hillary Clinton on the floor of the US Senate

Answer below the break
(more…)

Watching the Dems on this one [CAFTA] is like watching the French and Dutch on the EU Constitution. It is typically the out-of-power party in the Core that argues for go-slow on globalization, preying on people’s pain and fears. Ross Perot and the Republicans did it plenty under Clinton, and now the Dems do it big time under Bush. Leading is all about the future, and when you’re in power, it’s hard to do anything but embrace globalization for the challenges it represents. But when you feel like you’re falling behing in the game, like the French seem to feel across the board, then the best you can do is try and prevent the future for as long as possible.

–Thomas Barnett

I’ll say it again: Critics of capitalism once predicted that free markets would wreak mass starvation, depletion of resources, pollution, and death.

They’re now reduced to bitching about too many flavors of mustard.

We’ve won the debate.

–Radley Balko

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

–C.S. Lewis