May I have a Word?

 

And here, for all its likeness with current events, is where it isn’t funny anymore:

Donald Trump is well under way to win the nomination and probably split up the Republican Party in the process. I don’t want to give Trump more exposure, to be honest, whatever I read or see from that man nauseates and even scares me. I have a few words for you all, though.

There are boundaries in the political discourse that cannot be crossed. Period.

The political opponent is neither a con artist, a choke artist, a liar, nor lacking control of his bodily functions. Alluding to a candidate’s hands’size is well beyond those boundaries, too, because it alludes not really to trustworthiness but rather the man’s penis size in common lore. Even that didn’t stop one of the competitors.

The poor are not moochers, Mexicans are not rapists, doctors are not baby killers, Muslims are not terrorists.

The President is not a traitor, a liar, impeachable for any reason, nor is he destroying the country.

Supreme Court judges are not activist or traitors, nor are their rulings  unconstitutional.

Free speech is a privilege not only a constitutional right. Why  would I think that?

Because words matter.

When you denigrate a candidate you tear down your party and the political process to find a worthy nominee for President. If you gratuitously insult a President, you diminish the office. If you dismiss Supreme Court rulings and the judges, you attack the constitution itself. All three acts tear at the fabric of your Democracy and its institutions by making them less relevant and less worthy of defense.

When you go and summarily denigrate your fellow humans, don’t worry about your democracy anymore, you are on a path that ends in bloodshed for certain and possibly genocide.

I am scared of what is coming. Things over here are not much better. Today refugees were teargassed at the European border, amongst them children as young as five. I am scared and I am deeply ashamed, too.

The Watering Hole, Monday, February 29, 2016: Leap of Science Day

Monday, February 29, 2016, marks another nearly-quadrennial observation of the triumph of Science over Faith. Leap Day. The day we add to the calendar to correct for the fact that God didn’t make the Earth go around the Sun in a way that has any relation to how long it takes to spin once on its axis. Nor did God make the Moon orbit the Earth in an even number of days, or in relation to the Earth’s orbit around the Sun, which turned out to be the Center of our own Solar System (one of, it turns out, a hundred billion in just this Galaxy) contrary to what those men who had a direct pipeline to the Almighty Creator told everyone was true. Not for nothing, but doesn’t the fact that some otherwise ordinary man who was in charge of a Religion tortured people for not believing something that was scientifically inaccurate and still got to be called “infallible” make you think, even for a second, that maybe their Religion was wrong about other things, too? But I digress. Or not. Now the Moon goes around the Earth 13 times for each revolution of the Earth around the Sun, depending on how you measure them. I thought the number 13 was supposed to be bad. So why would God make our Moon go around the Earth a bad number of times in a year? In fact, assuming God did make our solar system, why make our planet have such a strange orbit? Why not a regular, circular, easily predictable, revolution, with no tilting of the planet and changing of the seasons? And why not start life in the tropics, instead of a desert? And why even bother with the other planets and planetary debris and asteroids if the point of this planet was to support life for the only living things in the universe? If there’s nothing on Mars for us to see, then why would God make Mars for us to see? Or let us name it for an inferior god? Sorry, but the whole Christian Creation Myth makes no more sense than any other cultures’ creation myths. When something doesn’t make sense through Reason, they tell us you have to have Faith. But Faith is just the rejection of Reason, so they are really telling us, “It makes sense if you don’t think about it.” Then why believe it? Why believe something is literally true if it makes no sense when you think about it? Then explain to me why you should threaten peoples’ lives for not believing it? But I digress. Again. Leap Day is a triumph because it was Science, not Religion, which revealed to us our method of keeping track of time needed adjusting if it was to keep in alignment with whichever celestial body was guiding our long term time reckoning. The ancient Egyptians used a much simpler calendar, which they knew needed tweaking every four years. To understand why we do it today, you have to go back to the time when Romulans walked the Earth.

About 2770 years ago, King Romulus, the first king of Rome and leader of the Romulan Empire, which consisted pretty much of just his kingdom, was said to have invented the Roman calendar. Other people were keeping track of time in their own way, so it’s not like he invented the entire concept of the calendar. He just invented the one that would become the basis of the one we use here in America today (and many other places, which are alleged to exist on this planet.) The one that started when winter ended, in a month named for the God of War. Wait, what? You heard that right. King Romulus may not have been entirely sure of what he wanted, but hew knew he wanted his calendar to have ten months. Some historians believe (which means the rest don’t) that the ancient Romans did not believe in fighting wars during the Winter, so the new year began when Winter ended. Which is why they named their first month Martius, after Mars, the God of War. The next month was named Aprilis, though no one’s really sure why. Some think it was really called Aphrilis and was named for Aphrodite. But that would be silly because Aphrodite was the Greek Goddess of Love, not the Roman one, Venus. Others less silly think it was named for the Latin verb Aperire, meaning to open, on account of that’s about the time flowers started opening all over the place. Makes better sense than naming it after another group’s gods. His third month was called Maius, after Maia, the Goddess of growth and plants. The fourth was called Junius, named after Juno, Queen of the Gods and patroness of weddings and marriages. Then King Romulus must have gotten tired because the remaining six months were named after the numbers Five through Ten. Quintilis, Sextilis, September, October, November, and December. Martius, Maius, Quintilis and October would have 31 days, the rest 30. Then they apparently let 61 days and a couple of moons go by before they would begin their new calendar.

Loonies that they were, the Romulan calendar was based on the phases of the Moon. Now if the point of having a calendar is to tell when you when it’s time to plant the crops, you’re going to run into problems basing it on the phases of the moon. Here’s why:

The orbit of the Moon around the Earth is not an easy process. The Moon makes a complete orbit around the Earth approximately once every 28 days. This means that the Moon orbits the Earth around 13 times in a year. The complex part pops up because there are several ways to consider a complete orbit of the Moon, but the two most familiar are: the “sidereal month” being the time it takes to make a complete orbit with respect to the stars, about 27.3 days; and the “synodic month” being the time it takes to reach the same phase, about 29.5 days. These differ because in the meantime the Earth and Moon have both orbited some distance around the Sun.

“Phase” is the way to describe the relative position of any object that moves in a cyclical form. The phase of the Moon is measured in degrees, from 0 (zero) to 360 (three hundred and sixty).

It doesn’t take long before a lunar-based calendar gets, to use the technically correct scientific term, out of whack. And that happened to the Romulan calendar. Each of its months had day markers that fell on the first new moon, the days of the half moons, and the days of the full moon. The new moon marked the first day of the month and was called the Calends. The Ides fell on the full moon, and the Nones were eight days before the Ides. Events were documented according to how many days they happened before or after these markers. This calendar really didn’t work because it didn’t align very well with the seasons, so about fifty years later, King Numa Pompilius, decided to make some changes. He added Januarius and Februarius to the beginning of the year, rather than to the end. This meant the months named for their position in the year no longer matched. I’m sure that bothered a lot of people. It bothers me to this day. And it still didn’t work. They even had a system where someone (not necessarily the emperor) would add an extra month, called an intercalary month, to try to get the calendar in line with the seasons. Finally, Julius Caesar (inventor of the Orange Julius and, later in his career, a successful Las Vegas casino magnate) did away with intercalary months, renamed Quintilis after himself, and borrowed the idea of the Leap Year from the Egyptians, whom he was fucking on the side. Some final adjustments were added by a subsequent ruler, Augustus, who took the liberty of renaming Sextilis after himself. Who knows? If Rome hadn’t fallen when it did, the months of September through December might be called something else by now.

The Gregorian Calendar we use today was based on Pope Gregory’s dislike of the idea that Easter was always shifting around on the calendar, so he made some more adjustments that included the fact that while there would be a Leap Year every four years, there wouldn’t be in years divisible by 100 (such as 1700, 1800 and 1900) unless they were also divisible by 400 (2000). Then he decided to take eleven days out of the calendar to make everything line up better. The official change in the colonies happened in 1752. George Washington was actually born Feb 11, 1732 under the Julian Calendar. When the switch to the Gregorian was made, Washington simply changed his birthday to the familiar Feb 22, 1732. Some people, perhaps those who believed God really did have a book in which He wrote your date of birth and death, thought they were suddenly moved eleven days closer to their date of death (as determined by God’s Little Black Book.) This was nonsense, of course, because everyone knew God was using the Mayan Calendar and we were all going to die in 2012. So even though the motivation to change the calendar was based on Religion, we can thank Science that there was a rational, logical, objectively justifiable reason to add a Leap Day, and not because God told somebody to do it.

This is our once-every-four-years thread. But you can still feel free to discuss what you want.

Sunday Music

 

Have a good Sunday all you good people.

The Watering Hole, Saturday, February 27th, 2016: Antidote

I’ve been up all night wallowing in the dregs of American “humanity”, IOW, reading headlines and comments on various internet sites. Right now I don’t even want to think about what a despicable, bigoted, uncaring, brutish devolution of a formerly (somewhat) civilized society we’ve become.

So, since I’ve blown right through sunrise here in the east, missing it completely, I’m putting up someone else’s glorious and unusually-tinted sunrise photo as an antidote to the darkness in my mind and soul. I hope it soothes your souls, too.

This is our daily Open Thread – talk about whatever you want.

The Watering Hole, Friday February 26, 2016

Drinking songs?

The Case For Privatizing Social Security

 

1. $2.7 TRILLION in Social Security taxes paid has been spent by the Federal Government instead of being held in trust to fund the benefits promised to the American workers.
2. This, then, creates a $2.7 trillion debt to those workers.
3. If Social Security is privatized, the debt would instead be owed to the ruling class. In other words, taxpayers would have to pay additional taxes to repay that debt to the investors who snap up the Social Security “trust” fund.
4. Future Social Security ‘taxes’ would then be invested in the unregulated, boom and bust financial industry. With every bust, worker’s retirements would be wiped out, to the benefit of the ruling class.

Thus the ruling class has $2.7 trillion reasons for privatizing Social Security.

The Watering Hole; Friday February 26 2016; The Political Brain Drain

No verbal essay today. Instead, below is an able summation of not only the week’s nonsensical political brain drain, but also of the last year’s political brain drain, all captured via the words of a pair of academy award-eligible right wing nutcases.

First, Michele Bachmann, who points out to pseudo-historian David Barton the erroneous factoid many of us have had pounded into us since birth, that A ‘Biblical Basis For Society’ Is The Key To Happiness.

As Batscat notes, “You could summarize it by saying, ‘Get a brain.”

Indeed.

And now, Alex Jones lets fly on how ‘No Amount Of Fluoride In The Water’ Can Stop Donald Trump. Jones appears to like the prospect of a Donald Trump Presidency even more than my abhorrence of said concept. Hard to imagine joy at the notion, I know, but . . . well, you be the judge.

And finally, on a somewhat brighter note, Oklahoma gun range owner and Second Amendment zealot Jan Morgan — whom Marco Rubio recently criticized for not allowing a US Army reservist to use her range because he’s a Muslim — had this to say in her non-endorsement of Rubio’s presidential aspirations:

“If Marco Rubio thinks that training and putting guns in the hands of people who align themselves with a theocracy that commands them to kill innocent people, if that’s his definition of immoral, then he needs to be running on another ticket and I expect, any day now, to hear him announcing endorsements from the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, Hamas and ISIS.”

How nice it must be to live somewhere amongst such truly fine people, amongst folks who would NEVER stoop so low as to kill innocent people just because some so-called “leaders” might train them, ‘put guns in their hands,’ and then command them to . . . you know, like go to war, kill people, stuff like that. If I should ever happen upon such a place, I’ll pass the word, with directions even. Meanwhile, I shall be waiting with baited breath to hear — from Rubio himself — confirmation of those rumored endorsements.

Trump, Rubio, Cruz, Carson, Kasich . . . McConnell, Ryan, Priebus . . . Limbaugh, Savage, Jones . . . Palin et al. et al. Every time I run across a Republican, no matter the position, no matter anything at all . . . I’m reminded of this:

As I was going up the stair
I met a man who wasn’t there.
He wasn’t there again today.
I wish, I wish he’d stay away.
(Hughes Mearns)

Explains a lot. Pretty much defines the GOP, and why ‘I wish, I wish (they’d go) away.’ Amen.

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole; Thursday February 25 2016; Guantanamo SOLUTION!

GOP Rep: ‘I Don’t Know’ If Military Would Follow Orders To Close Gitmo

I know how to make it happen!

President Obama is being raked over the Republican coals yet one more time, and all because he has once again suggested that the Guantanamo Detention Center (or whatever the hell it’s called) be permanently and forever closed, that the prisoners held there be (finally) treated as if law, and fair trial, and innocence, and guilt each and all mean something in this country. Republicans, of course, have freaked out over the concept — “We’ll all be dead!!!” they scream. “Terrorists! Muslims! Oh Ick!! Leave ’em there!!”

I have a better idea.

I heard on the news somewhere that it costs us about $5 million per terrorist per year to keep those nasty bums incarcerated down there in Guantanamo. And since Republicans want to keep Guantanamo open for the foreseeable future, we can count on that expense to continue — for the foreseeable. So in view of that, I offer my suggestions — solutions! — to the Guantanamo mess; SOLUTIONS to those who would benefit most, i.e. to Congressional Republicans along with Republican Presidential candidates everywhere.

My proposed five-step procedure is a simple one:

1. Set up an (offshore/tax free) account for each of the incarcerees in the amount of $5 million U.S., and guarantee an additional annual (tax free) deposit of $5 million per year for each of them, for the foreseeable.
2. Via official paperwork, grant each and every incarceree an American name, full identity papers,  and full citizenship (including, of course the right to keep and bear arms) with but one proviso: no passport can be issued for the foreseeable; i.e. each incarceree must agree to live the rest of his life as if he was born a rich Republican, and he must do so with nary a complaint about anything, EVER!
3. Set up each incarceree (and his family, if he so desires) in a beach-front home/property anywhere along the Atlantic coast (south of the Mason-Dixon line) or anywhere along the Gulf of Mexico coast from S. Florida to S. Texas, each property to be fully paid for with funds that would otherwise be wasted on toilet seats by the Defense Department.
4. Allow each incarceree (and all of his age-eligible family members) to register to vote in whichever state they choose to live, with but one proviso: each and all MUST swear to ALWAYS vote Republican in EVERY election, ando NEVER for a Democrat or an Independent, upon guarantee of torture via waterboarding or whatever method is in vogue at the time of any such treasonous indiscretion.
5. Allow Republicans to proclaim and insist full credit for having solved the Guantanamo issue by ignoring Obama’s ridiculous and anti-American proposals of allowing the law and the Constitution to waste even more money on trials; by strengthening America all-the-while increasing the number of Republican-voting devotees in the process.

It’s so simple!!!

I do hereby offer the above details of this full procedure proposal to the RNC, to the respective Senate and House majorities, and to any/all of their current (or future?) Presidential candidates, and all with NO CHARGE! today or forever! My gift to a free, and prosperous, and TOLERANT! America! So Reince! Mitch! Paul! Donald! Anyone! It’s right here, and it’s for YOU and for the 91! FREEDOM!

What could possibly go wrong?

******

OPEN THREAD

 

THE WATERING HOLE. DATELINE 24 FEBRUARY, 2016. GOP ANNOUNCES EDUCATION PLATFORM: FREE COLLEGE FOR ALL!

G.S. a front-runner for the next GoP Secretary of Education explains:

OPEN THREAD.

The Watering Hole, Tuesday February 23, 2016 – Environmental News and Food Politics

Mother Russia Pealing Off Layers

Baby it’s not so cold out there!

 

The Watering Hole: Monday, February 22, 2016: Your Gun Is Dangerous After All

According to the website Gun Violence Archive there has been a shooting incident or spree in which at least four people have died almost every single month since January 2014, the furthest back their site’s statistics go. And where last month’s mass shooting involved one family member killing five others before taking his own life during police negotiations, this past weekend’s incident in Kalamazoo, MI, involved someone apparently shooting people at random. That’s even worse. As tragic as the family shooting was, if you weren’t related to them (or living next door), odds are you were never in any danger. But the Uber driver who killed six seven and injured two another in between passenger pickups should scare the crap right out of you, because there was no rhyme or reason to how his victims were chosen. The only comforting thing is that he was caught so quickly, unlike the DC Beltway Sniper who terrorized people in the capital area for three weeks in October 2002 (during the time that President George W. Bush supposedly “kept us safe,” as certain delusional people like to keep repeating.) You only heard about this latest mass shooting because: A) it was the latest incident of a mass shooting out of far too many in this country, and B) more than one person died, unlike the other multiple shootings incidents that happened the same day.

We’re not even talking here about people shot and killed by our own police forces, which The Guardian is kind enough to keep track of for us here. We’re just talking about every day civilian Americans going nuts and shooting people. It’s become so common place now to hear of multiple people shot and killed that unless we personally know one of the victims, it doesn’t even bother us anymore. We almost never hear about the thousands who were single victims of their gun-toting killers. And unless they were famous celebrities battling the evil demons of depression, we hear even less of the nearly twice as many people who took their own lives by gun. (Would it surprise you to know that a suicide by gun happens about once every thirty minutes?) Regardless of the ultimate reasons for their use, each of these gun deaths had one undeniable fact in common: each involved the use of a gun. Now there are those who are ready to debunk just about any statistic you can name for whether or not things are safer due to the incredible proliferation of easily acquired guns in this country, but you cannot argue that each and every one of these deaths would have happened by some other method, and in the same incident, and the resulting number of deaths would have been unchanged. That is easily false. Certainly at least some, whether a majority or not is irrelevant but certainly a non-trivial percentage, of those gun deaths happened just because a gun was available to use. Many gun supporters argue that guns are not dangerous. This is pure bullshit. Besides the few dozen or so people killed by toddlers and pets around guns, there’s the point that guns are dangerous for many of the same reasons nuclear weapons are dangerous. Yes, both could “accidentally” go off and kill someone (or several thousand someones) nearby. But there’s a reason we don’t want other potentially hostile countries to have nuclear weapons: because they may have, or could soon have, a means of firing them at us from the safety of their own country elsewhere on the planet. Despite what then-National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice said in testimony, we did not learn on September 11, 2001, that our oceans no longer protected us. We learned that the day we learned the USSR (a country on which she was supposed to be an expert, but who did not foresee its collapse) possessed intercontinental ballistic missiles, with the nuclear warheads to put on top of them. They were able to kill or harm us from across the planet, just like someone with a gun can kill or harm you from across the room or street, and not have to put themselves in close proximity to you, where you might be able to take their weapon away from them. THAT is why guns are dangerous. I might be physically bigger and stronger than you, but if you can kill me before I can get close enough to punch that smarmy look-who’s-the-big-buy-now grin off your Shkreli-like face I’m not likely to survive an attack on you in self-defense. Without the gun, and possibly even with another hand weapon, you wouldn’t be as dangerous to me. It’s the gun that increases the danger.

Again, how can anyone argue guns are not dangerous? If guns aren’t dangerous, why do we make sure almost every soldier sent off to a war zone is equipped with a gun of some variety? Of what use are they in a confrontation with the enemy? Why don’t we give our soldiers headed to the Middle East buttons that say, “Ask me about my Saluki”? Why do the people we face in conflict often use guns if they’re not dangerous? Besides killing people, of what use are hand guns? You don’t hunt with them. You could use hand guns for target practice at a shooting range, but that would beg the question, “Why are you doing that?” You could properly answer with something about self-defense against bad guys with guns. So I ask if you would be shooting to kill them? If not, then why do you need a gun? And if so, then you’ve proven my point about what use they are. So if we agree they have no other purpose but to kill, then why are they not dangerous? Yes, people use things other than guns to kill one another and, yes, more people use bats and hammers to bludgeon people to death than use rifles, but rifles aren’t hand guns, and most of the other things people used to kill had been made for some other intended non-homicidal purpose. Not so with guns. Guns are made to kill. That’s their appeal to you people who own them. That’s the reason you keep them. Are you going to threaten an intruder with something non-lethal, or would you prefer to make the intruder think his life was in danger? Oh, wait, there’s that word again. Danger. Because of a gun. Which is supposedly not dangerous. Sorry, but the argument that guns are not dangerous just doesn’t stand up to close scrutiny and critical thinking. If guns weren’t dangerous, you gun owners wouldn’t feel safer carrying one around with you, would you? But if you carry one on your person somewhere, even concealed, now you’ll feel that YOU are a danger to bad guys who might try to pull something off in front of you. Which means your gun is dangerous after all.

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to discuss guns or anything else you wish to discuss.

The Watering Hole, Saturday, February 20th, 2016: Huh?

I think that the Koch brothers are attempting to put a ‘softer light’ on their well-deserved evil reputations.

Earlier this week at the office, I found the following missive, purportedly from David Koch, in the Junk emailbox of our Sales emails. (I’m wondering if Koch got his mailing list from the American Landrights Association, whose occasional emails land in the same Junk box, or if ALA gets their mailing list from the Kochs.) Who knows if it really is from THE David Koch; regardless, I found it interesting/amusing.

From: Mr.David H. Koch [mailto:davidhamiltonkoch74@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 3:02 PM
Subject: HI DONATION FOR YOU !!.

Hi,

My name is David Hamilton Koch, a philanthropist and the founder of Koch Industries, one of the largest private foundations in the world. I believe strongly in ‘giving while living I had one idea that never changed in my mind, that you should use your wealth to help people and I have decided to secretly give USD$2,000,000.00 Million Dollars to randomly selected individuals worldwide.

On receipt of this email, you should count yourself as the lucky individual. Your email address was chosen online while searching at random. Kindly get back to me at your earliest convenience, so that I will know your email address is valid.

Email me (davidhamiltonkoch75@gmail.com)

Visit my web page to know more about me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_H._Koch

Regards,
David H. Koch.
Email (davidhamiltonkoch75@gmail.com)

Huh? WTF?

Then, late last night, RawStory put up this post from the Guardian about Charles Koch agreeing with Bernie Sanders that ‘politics are set up to help the privileged few.’ Charles Koch wrote the following op-ed piece for the Washington Post:

Charles Koch: This is the one issue where Bernie Sanders is right
By Charles G. Koch February 18

Charles G. Koch is chairman and chief executive of Koch Industries.

As he campaigns for the Democratic nomination for president, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) often sounds like he’s running as much against me as he is the other candidates. I have never met the senator, but I know from listening to him that we disagree on plenty when it comes to public policy.

Even so, I see benefits in searching for common ground and greater civility during this overly negative campaign season. That’s why, in spite of the fact that he often misrepresents where I stand on issues, the senator should know that we do agree on at least one — an issue that resonates with people who feel that hard work and making a contribution will no longer enable them to succeed.

The senator is upset with a political and economic system that is often rigged to help the privileged few at the expense of everyone else, particularly the least advantaged. He believes that we have a two-tiered society that increasingly dooms millions of our fellow citizens to lives of poverty and hopelessness. He thinks many corporations seek and benefit from corporate welfare while ordinary citizens are denied opportunities and a level playing field.

I agree with him.

Consider the regulations, handouts, mandates, subsidies and other forms of largesse our elected officials dole out to the wealthy and well-connected. The tax code alone contains $1.5 trillion in exemptions and special-interest carve-outs. Anti-competitive regulations cost businesses an additional $1.9 trillion every year. Perversely, this regulatory burden falls hardest on small companies, innovators and the poor, while benefitting many large companies like ours. This unfairly benefits established firms and penalizes new entrants, contributing to a two-tiered society.

Whenever we allow government to pick winners and losers, we impede progress and move further away from a society of mutual benefit. This pits individuals and groups against each other and corrupts the business community, which inevitably becomes less focused on creating value for customers. That’s why Koch Industries opposes all forms of corporate welfare — even those that benefit us. (The government’s ethanol mandate is a good example. We oppose that mandate, even though we are the fifth-largest ethanol producer in the United States.)

It may surprise the senator to learn that our framework in deciding whether to support or oppose a policy is not determined by its effect on our bottom line (or by which party sponsors the legislation), but by whether it will make people’s lives better or worse.

With this in mind, the United States’ next president must be willing to rethink decades of misguided policies enacted by both parties that are creating a permanent underclass.

Our criminal justice system, which is in dire need of reform, is another issue where the senator shares some of my concerns. Families and entire communities are being ripped apart by laws that unjustly destroy the lives of low-level and nonviolent offenders.

Today, if you’re poor and get caught possessing and selling pot, you could end up in jail. Your conviction will hold you back from many opportunities in life. However, if you are well-connected and have ample financial resources, the rules change dramatically. Where is the justice in that?

Arbitrary restrictions limit the ability of ex-offenders to get housing, student or business loans, credit cards, a meaningful job or even to vote. Public policy must change if people are to have the chance to succeed after making amends for their transgressions. At Koch Industries we’re practicing our principles by “banning the box.” We have voluntarily removed the question about prior criminal convictions from our job application.

At this point you may be asking yourself, “Is Charles Koch feeling the Bern?”

Hardly.

I applaud the senator for giving a voice to many Americans struggling to get ahead in a system too often stacked in favor of the haves, but I disagree with his desire to expand the federal government’s control over people’s lives. This is what built so many barriers to opportunity in the first place.

Consider America’s War on Poverty. Since its launch under President Lyndon Johnson in 1964, we have spent roughly $22 trillion, yet our poverty rate remains at 14.8 percent. Instead of preventing, curing and relieving the causes and symptoms of poverty (the goals of the program when it began), too many communities have been torn apart and remain in peril while even more tax dollars pour into this broken system.

It is results, not intentions, that matter. History has proven that a bigger, more controlling, more complex and costlier federal government leaves the disadvantaged less likely to improve their lives.

When it comes to electing our next president, we should reward those candidates, Democrat or Republican, most committed to the principles of a free society. Those principles start with the right to live your life as you see fit as long as you don’t infringe on the ability of others to do the same. They include equality before the law, free speech and free markets and treating people with dignity, respect and tolerance. In a society governed by such principles, people succeed by helping others improve their lives.

I don’t expect to agree with every position a candidate holds, but all Americans deserve a president who, on balance, can demonstrate a commitment to a set of ideas and values that will lead to peace, civility and well-being rather than conflict, contempt and division. When such a candidate emerges, he or she will have my enthusiastic support.

Double “HUH”?

This is a perfect example of a Libertarian’s attempt to sound reasonable and logical: while one can agree with bits and pieces of his statements, the overall premise(s) make for an unworkable government and an even more fractured society than we already have. And while Koch supposedly decries the dysfunctional state of American politics, he at the same time admits that he and his brother have benefited greatly from this dysfunction. What he doesn’t admit is that he and his brother, along with their various front groups, have actually deliberately caused said dysfunction.

I don’t have the time to pick this op-ed apart line-by-line, so I’ll leave it to you, should you be so inclined.

This is our daily Open Thread – have at it!

The Watering Hole, February 19, 2016 – Music Night

Been listening to  a lot of Pandora while converting our garage to a living space, set to the “Road Trip” station. Cats and I will be going on one on March. They play a lot of Credence on the Pandora set. Good choice.

 

The Watering Hole; Friday February 19 2016; Idiotica II

Can the Dumb — define the Divine?
(Emily Dickinson)

I’m pretty sure Dickinson knew the answer to that one long before she asked it. But think of it: when she wrote that line, she’d never met even a single one of the 2016 Republicans, neither candidates nor voters! Makes me think that maybe Dumb and Divine have a longer history than just the last sixty or-so years that I’ve been pondering said relationship.

In any case and for whatever reason, in this, the current political season, both Dumb and Divine seem to be in permanent rotation around each in the cluster of Republican presidential candidates. I frankly can’t recall a moment anywhere in previous political campaigns that has been so overladen with religious posturing as we witness today. What’s most puzzling is not so much the topics, but the vitriol tossed in the midst of would-be civil discussion by each, against all, and oh so often in the name of the Divinity commonly known as ‘Judeo-Christian’ — and all other versions be damned! Gives new meaning to the old “holier than thou” notion, but always with conclusion that Dickinson’s question is now answered: Can the Dumb — define the Divine? No. Definitely not. No way!

A couple of recent non-events did offer me reason(s) to grin, however, especially when I dropped them into Emily Dickinson’s context. She never heard of either Donald Trump or Ted Cruz, but if she had I’m betting her response would have been something like See, I told you!!

First, this little gem:

Pope Francis Says Donald Trump Is Not A Christian

Interesting twist embedded in this one, a twist that does seem to suggest that the Pope’s long-rumored Divinity may indeed be genuine, especially if one dares to accept the reverse of Dickinson’s question, i.e. can the Divine define the Dumb? In this case, the Pope didn’t actually ‘define’ Trump as Dumb, but the Pope-inspired Trump reaction pretty much did the job for him (see below)!

Not sure, though, that defining the Dumb should be strictly limited  to the Divine, because if that were the case, most of us Progressive-Liberals would have to be defined as Divine, since we really are good at defining the Dumb . . . etc. Still, Trump’s comeback definitely confirms the thesis that the Pope can most certainly pluck the Dumb out of even a YUGE pile of candidate vitriol!

Donald Trump Fires Back At Pope Francis

Trump: I guess this is a little bit for the press, so I just wrote this out, very quickly about the Pope, do you want to hear it? Should I read it to you? He actually said that maybe I’m not a good Christian, or something, it’s unbelievable and not a nice thing to say. So as a response —

If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’ ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been president. Because this would not have happened if ISIS has been eradicated. . . .

Right. Perfect response. Expected. Definitive, and definitely NOT Divine!

Trump’s supporters, meanwhile, seem to lend further credibility to the notion that the Pope is genuinely Divine, as demonstrated by their attempts to define him. Below are a handful of Trump-supporter Tweets on the matter, each and all of which serve as solid proof that the Dumb really can’t define the Divine (or much of anything else, for that matter).

Pope Francis sends unhinged Trump supporters into a white-hot rage: ‘He’s prob a Muslim in disguise!’

Ryan Edmonds ?@EdmondsRyan76
I thought the pope was “supposed” to be sinless…isn’t he making judgment on Trump? He’s prob a Muslim in disguise like Obama.

Chuck Plum @ChuckUmeboshi

LENIN’S POPE, ACCUSER OF THE BRETHREN, ON TRUMP: ANYONE WHO WANTS BORDER WALLS ISN’T CHRISTIAN
Vatican is Walled!

SCSM @Ms1Scs
pope-a-dope is a commie beard, OK w/ Obama turning back 2 Christian persecution,against Trump 2 STOP persecution?

Stop the Clintons @barackmustgo
Pope stay out of our polotics. Trump stays out of your decisions.Pope gets wall/ protection why cant We? Very dissapointed.. cnn-shame on U.

Jack Hennessey @republic2016
The pope clearly revealed himself as an anti Trump political South American Communist as has been rumoured. Reveals elite open borders plan

There. The Dumb defined. By themselves. Thanks to a little help (which I don’t think they really needed, but what the hey!) from the Pope who is, according to some, Divine. Ergo yes, the Divine can, indeed, define the Dumb. Q.E.D.

Finally and on a somewhat different plane, there was this, courtesy of TRUSTED Cruz:

Cruz: ‘Disastrous’ Marriage Equality Ruling Led To ‘Persecution’ That’s ‘Unprecedented’

“[W]e are seeing an assault on religious liberty from Washington that is unprecedented . . . much of this persecution is the fruit of the Supreme Court’s disastrous gay marriage ruling last year . . .

“I believe that decision was fundamentally illegitimate, it was lawless, it was unconstitutional and it will not stand. And I would note, that is precisely why Dr. James Dobson has endorsed me in this campaign, it is why Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has endorsed me in this campaign, it’s why the National Organization on Marriage [sic] has endorsed me on this campaign and has said it cannot support Donald Trump or Marco Rubio because if we’re not willing to defend marriage, we are giving up the foundational building blocks of the family, we’re giving up the Judeo-Christian values that built this great nation.”

Just a guess, but the impression I invariably get from Cruz is that he does, indeed, see himself as bright enough and smart enough to define the Divine; he also KNOWS the Divine definition of marriage and how IT also defines the United States as being ITS own creation and ITS most favorite nation, etc. etc.

That is, come to think of it, pretty much the way the Dumb almost invariably define the Divine. It’s also pretty much the way Republicans — candidates and voters alike — define their perception of the Divine, and greatly simplifies the Progressive Liberals’ task of defining the Dumb: aka Republicans.

OK, so: as Judy Woodruff likes to say, “We’ll have to leave it there . . .” etc.

The Future — never spoke —
Nor will He — like the Dumb —
Reveal by sign — a syllable
Of His Profound To Come –
(Emily Dickinson)

******

OPEN THREAD

 

 

The Watering Hole; Thursday February 18 2016; Idiotica

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats’ feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
(T.S.Eliot)

With every day that passes, T.S. Eliot’s visionary description of the “modern” GOP (read: AFP, the American Fascist Party) and the consequence(s) implicit thereof proves itself to be one of the most incredibly accurate descriptions of current time warp imaginable. And, of course, let us not fail to recall that Eliot wrote those words the better part of a century ago. Talk about prescience! The only argument I can come up with that’s the least bit contrary is that he titled his poem “The Hollow Men” and, in so doing, left no obvious space for all Hollow Women of current day. Of course Eliot never ran across Phyllis Schlafly, et al. (at least I don’t think he did — she’s really not 250-plus, is she? Hmmmm). Still, in a world where one could swear that Ted Cruz IS Joe McCarthy . . .

Yeah, OK, I get it, never mind.

Whatever. The fact is that stupid remains stupid, no matter the year. I choose, as my preferred and eternal descriptor, the word ‘Idiotica’ — as in Encyclopedia Idiotica: History’s Worst Decisions and the People Who Made Them — even though it has become, as of this moment, horrendously out of date, and . . . (see below for a detail or two. Three maybe):

Schlafly: GOP Must Block All Obama Judicial Nominees, Strip Courts Of Funding And Power

Of course Senate Republicans should block President Obama from filling this Supreme Court vacancy in an election year, and they have 80 years of precedent on their side. But Republicans should go further and block nominations for all the other vacancies in the federal judiciary, too.

. . . Congress can more effectively defund enforcement of the pro-abortion and pro-homosexual marriage decisions by the judiciary without sparking a phony “war on women” debate.

Congress should also defund use of taxpayer money by the Department of Justice to push the liberal agenda in the liberal courts. Congress should cut back on the funding for the courts themselves, too, and eliminate rather than fill some of the vacancies.

Scott Lively: Obama Orchestrated Coup In Ukraine To Prevent Russian-Style Anti-Gay Laws From Sweeping The World

. . . Obama pulled the plug on Russia; I know this sounds like a terrible conspiracy theory but I believe it, and they he then orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and then sort of kick-started the Cold War again. I believe, personally, a lot of people might not, but I believe that one of the main reasons for him doing that was to stop the Russians from setting the example across the world because this agenda is heart and soul to Obama.”

John Hagee Says America ‘Will Be Lost Forever And Immediately’ If Obama Is Allowed To Replace Justice Scalia

“Justice Scalia’s death makes this presidential election a battle for the future of this nation,” Hagee said. “If the president is allowed by the Senate to appoint a Supreme Court justice, America as we know it will be lost forever and immediately. A fifth liberal justice on the court will pass the socialist agenda of the president with lightening speed. Every person listening to this telecast should contact their senator and urge them not to consider any candidate to replace Justice Scalia on the Supreme Court until the next president has been elected by the American people. For once, let the voice of the American people make the call, not the political establishment in Washington, D.C.”

Far-Right Pundit: Obama To ‘Starve Americans Into FEMA Camps’ After Murdering Scalia

“I think the starvation, the plan to starve Americans into the FEMA camps” will soon be unveiled, Quayle said, arguing that Scalia’s death foretells the death of the Constitution.

“When you kill off the oldest guy who is foundationally sound — I would say this, Judge Scalia’s murder is equal to, if you will, the last pillar holding up what was left of the Constitution. I believe, and somebody’s already put it out on the internet, if you believe in the Constitution, you will be a criminal,” he said.

Pat Robertson: Bernie Sanders Voters Are ‘A Bunch Of Ignorant Sheep’

While criticizing the “so-called millenniums” today, Pat Robertson skewered Bernie Sanders supporters as “a bunch of ignorant sheep” who are “cheering a man who wants to take away all our money.”

So here we are then. Ignorant sheep. Works for me. Ergo, from one “ignorant sheep” to what I presume to be a whole flock of “ignorant sheep,” The Hollow Men  concluded, long ago, the consequence to a culture that chooses to kneel before its . . . ummmm . . . its Hollow Men?

. . . Life is very long

Between the desire
And the spasm
Between the potency
And the existence
Between the essence
And the descent
Falls the Shadow

For Thine is the Kingdom . . .

This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
(T.S.Eliot)

Yep. De-evolution via Hollow Men aka the GOP mind-meld. History repeats. Again.

OPEN THREAD

THE WATERING HOLE

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. (United States Constitution (1787) Article 3, Section 1.)

The Constitution does not state the number of Justices on the Supreme Court. If Congress wanted to, it could let Scalia’s seat remain vacant indefinitely.

We have entered an era of brazen partisanship on the part of the extreme right-wing, funded and fueled by an oligarchy who have openly declared class warfare on everyone else. The oligarchy controls so much wealth they write the laws that in turn increase their holdings.

Favorable rulings by the Supreme Court allowed them to further tighten their grasp of our government. And, over the years, Republicans have slowly but steadily moved the federal court system to the right, to supporting corporations over people, the rich and powerful over everyone else. Case in point: class action lawsuits are becoming a thing of the past. Odds are, if you have any credit card or cell phone, you have a contract waiving your right to class action lawsuits, and waiving your right to go to court.

That’s right. In far too many instances, you cannot go to court to take on a multinational corporation. Your legal rights have been privatized – you must go to arbitration, an alternative system of justice where the arbitrator’s power may be virtually unlimited – the power to ignore the law, and to ignore the facts. And it’s damn-near impossible to get a court to overturn an arbitrator’s decision. Oh, and you have to pay for the arbitrator. The privatizing of justice, in the civil arena.

In the criminal arena, we already know that we have privatized prisons. The only legal form of slavery in the world.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. (United States Constitution, XIII Amendment, Section 1.)

Private, for profit prisons, where someone could be locked up for life under a “three-strikes” law.

Justice Scalia is dead, but his legacy in the form of decisions he authored, majorities he joined, lives on.

Republicans, within hours of his passing announced that they will not ratify anyone President Obama nominates. That is their right under the Constitution.

The only non-violent recourse We, the People have is to vote Republicans out of power, at every level of government. If we’re to lazy to mobilize and do just that, we get the government we deserve.

OPEN THREAD

[the opinions stated are those of the author and not necessarily that of The Zoo)

 

 

 

The Watering Hole, Tuesday February 16, 2016 -Environmental News and Food Politics

Before the next set of primaries and Republican tantrums about Supreme Court nominees set in, how about a trip to the lighter side? Here’s Galanty Miller’s take on vegetarianism:

“It’s not that I’m against eating animals. Rather, I oppose the inhumane way in which they’re raised. It’s the same reason I won’t eat home-schooled children.

I’m a vegetarian. Vegetarian is a misleading word, though. Forgoing meat does not, by definition, mean eating vegetables. I’m really more of a Doritorian. Especially cool ranch flavored.

There has been a lot written about vegetarianism. So far, I’ve avoided the topic because I’m not sure I have any new perspective to add. But then I realized, “Hey, it’s 2016 America; I write for the same reason that everyone does everything now- to draw attention to myself.

Meat eaters argue that it’s our “biological instinct” to eat meat. Well, to those people who live in caves and hunt down wooly mammoths with a spear, you have a point. However, it’s kind of a stretch to include factory-processed Chicken McNuggets and “biological instinct” in the same sentence.

Have you tried the Slim Jim-flavored Snapple? It’s made from the worst stuff on earth.

By “biological instinct,” you mean survival. It’s our human nature to survive. Neanderthals didn’t have the pasta salad option. Luckily, life is better now. We don’t have to eat meat and we wear pants.”

more…

 

The Watering Hole, Monday, February 15th, 2016: “It’s In Revelations (sic), People!”

While I was trying to research more on the recent story accusing several Republicans of directly trying to convince Iran to hold off releasing American hostages until our Presidential election is over – and I DO hope that we learn more about who these (R) bastards are – I ran into the following article, and just had to go for the ludicrously funny instead.

When I googled info on the Iran story, I was rather surprised to find that two of the three most recent articles about it were from “Christian” sites: the Christian Times, and the Christian Post. Of course, it was when I got to the Christian Post that I got distracted by what I am presenting today. I’m not sure what writing style author David is attempting to use, but I’m thinking it could be tongue-in-cheek/snark? Maybe you can tell.

Also, keep in mind that I do not remember being taught anything about the Book of Revelation in all my thirteen years of Catholic schooling. While that doesn’t necessarily mean that I wasn’t taught something, simply that I do not remember – which, in high school, could have been understandable (if you catch my drift.)

“10 Things You Gotta Know About Revelation”

“You gotta know these 10 things about Revelation. You just gotta!

1. It’s the book of Revelation not Revelations.

Don’t say “I iz reading Revelations whilst Ma is cooks up some possum pie. It’s pertnear my favrit book. I think I’ll go read it by the cement pond.” That sounds ignorant all because you made Revelation plural. Don’t be ignorant!”

And that’s just for openers. I seriously wonder at what target audience this is being aimed. Ruzicka continues:

“It’s also not the Revelation of John. It’s the Revelation of Jesus Christ.”

This line is, confusingly, set next to a photo of a book opened to a page titled “The Revelation of St.John the Divine.”

2. John is the writer of Revelation and a MUCH bigger deal than you. Or me.

John had left the fishing business to follow Jesus. He followed Jesus for three years of ministry. He saw people raised from the dead, and saw Jesus walk on the water. John was at the last supper, there when Jesus was arrested, there as Jesus died on the cross — in fact the ONLY disciple there — all the others fled. Jesus told John to take care of Mary (Jesus’ mother). He was there at the empty tomb; he was among the first to believe. Nobody has lived a life like John lived.

So, John was a roadie?

3. He was known as the “beloved disciple” or “the disciple whom Jesus loved (John 21:20).”

It would not be an overstatement to say that John considered Jesus to be his “best friend.”

Is the author trying to hint at something here?

4. John wrote John, 1st, 2nd and 3rd John.

Well, jeez, I should hope he didn’t have a ghostwriter.

5. John is about 100 years old.

In god dog years?

6. John is banished on an island for criminals — Isle of Patmos — by the Emperor Domitian.

Why? Because he wouldn’t shut up about Jesus. This is where he writes Revelation.

Hmmm…he writes Revelation while on an island for criminals. Must’ve been inspired?

7. John survived martyrdom.

He was boiled in a huge basin of oil during a wave of persecution in Rome. However, he was miraculously delivered from death. The apostle John was later freed and returned to what is now modern-day Turkey. He died as an old man, the only apostle to die peacefully.

WTF? Did his miraculous delivery from death heal the boiling-oil scars? Seriously, how does one manage to be almost boiled to death in oil and not incur even second-degree burns over a large part of his body? Burns which would – in those times – likely become festering infected sores that would possibly be fatal?

8. He pastors the seven churches he’s writing to in Revelation 1.

Ooo-kay, so John was a multi-tasker, fine, this is important how?

9. John didn’t fail.

100 years old, boiled in oil, banished to an island for criminals, still a faithful witness for King Jesus, his best friend. John lived a life far beyond anything we can imagine. For all the base jumping, cliff diving, ice climbing and BMXing out there — it’s nothing compared to the life John lived.

Seriously, dude? Dismissing the crappy examples of, I’m guessing, youthful adventure like ‘cliff diving’ and ‘BMXing’, there are plenty of people who have led long, interesting, worthwhile humanitarian lives without all of the torture or all the Jesus.

10. You’ll never find out when it all ends by studying numerology or Bible codes or counting cards in Vegas (just in case you were wondering).

And that’s not the point of the book. Jesus says Himself that no one but the Father knows (Matthew 24:36). [Which, as you know, is one of Wayne’s pet peeves, since so many charlatans are raking in the $ predicting the End Times ETA.]

The point of the book is to encourage persecuted believers, that in spite of any emperor’s hatred and even murder of Christians, King Jesus wins in the end. The Christian life is not trial free, but trial proof, not persecution free, but persecution proof, not tribulation free, but tribulation proof.

This is somehow supposed to sound attractive, or hopeful, or what? And somehow this version of the Book of Revelation that Ruvick CliffNotes does not sound like the strange, Heironomous Bosch

The point of the book is this: King Jesus gets the last word, He wins in the end, and so take heart! He will draw all of His to Himself to live with Him forever. Amen.

“I am the Alpha and the Omega — the beginning and the end,” says the Lord God. “I am the one who is, who always was, and who is still to come — the Almighty One.”
Revelation 1:8 (NLT)

Somehow none of this is inspiring me to “take heart.”

This is our daily Open Thread – talk amongst yourselves.

Sunday Roast: Antonin Scalia is no more*

Via RawStory (various headlines):

“On behalf of the court and retired justices, I am saddened to report that our colleague Justice Antonin Scalia has passed away,” Chief Justice John Roberts said in a statement on Saturday, calling Scalia, 79, an “extraordinary individual and jurist.”

My dear old Mom always said, “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.”  So here’s me sitting quietly…

Here’s how Antonin Scalia’s death changes the balance of the court and alters the 2016 presidential race.

Minutes after Scalia’s death right-wingers seek to block nominee Obama hasn’t even appointed yet.

Obama speaks about passing of Supreme Court Justice Scalia.  Our President is such a kind man…

Jon Stewart shreds Scalia’s marriage-equality dissent:  “He had no problem telling voters to ‘f*ck off’ in Citizens United.  Feel the Bern…

And finally, this apropo headline from The Onion:

Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress

*HT to John Cleese in Monty Python’s “Dead Parrot” sketch for the headline of this post.

This is our daily open thread — Leave your thoughts in the comments section, while I sit here quietly.

The Watering hole, Saturday, February 13, 2016: We Need Less of Moore’s Ilk – UPDATED

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is at it again. It seems no matter how hard he tries, which appears to be not very, Moore can’t seem to wrap his head around the fact that the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land, and its rulings take precedence over any state or local law. Despite having lost his job once before in 2003 for refusing to follow the orders of the SCOTUS when they ruled he must remove a monument to the Ten Commandments from state property, Moore may be about to lose his job again, and for the same reason – failing to obey a SCOTUS ruling because it contradicted his personal religious beliefs. Moore claims the SCOTUS ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges is confusing because it says that not only must Alabama let gay people marry, but it has to recognize lawful same-sex marriages in other states. This violates the Chief Justice’s personal religious beliefs and he believes that is reason enough to order all Alabama probate judges in Alabama to stop issuing marriage licences to same-sex couples. He is wrong, of course, and in violation of his oath of office. Again. Like every public official in this country, elected or appointed, Moore took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. That oath does not allow for exceptions where you feel your religious beliefs are being ignored, or because you feel that state law takes precedence over federal law. In fact, on the latter point the Constitution is quite clear. “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Chief Justice Roy Moore does not believe this means SCOTUS rulings take precedence over Alabama State Law. How he ever got through law school and was allowed to practice law and even become a judge with this belief is beyond comprehension. What in that clause would make anyone think a state’s constitution or laws would be superior to the federal Constitution? How can any sane, intelligent person make that argument? The answer is they can’t, which means any person making such an argumetn is not sane and intelligent. Especially when they say their religious beliefs are superior to any court rulings. Part of the problem here is that Alabama elects their state’s highest judges rather than appoint them and make them go through a confirmation process conducted by people who at least have more of an understanding of the law than the average voter. (In my home state of New York, our state’s highest court judges are appointed by the governor and confirmed by our State Senate.) Your average voter is completely ignorant about how the law and the constitution work, so putting the choice of who should be deciding how their laws are interpreted in the hands of people who are completely unqualified to make that determination is ridiculous. Too many people wrongly believe this nation is officially Christian and should abide by Christian law, which seems to be based entirely on Jewish Law given how often they quote the Old Testament. This is the kind of person Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is: a conservative evangelical with the warped belief that Christianity is the law of this land, the First Amendment to the contrary notwithstanding. He needs to be impeached, convicted, removed from office and barred from ever holding public office again. So does Associate Justice of the United States Antonin Scalia.

Justice Antonin Scalia is also at it again. What he’s at is demonstrating his complete and utter disqualification to be interpreting our nation’s constitution. In a recent speech to a Catholic high school class, Scalia made the claim that “there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that prohibits the government from legislating, establishing, or favoring religion over non-religion.” He thinks it’s possible, but he seems unsure, that the Constitution may prohibit the government from favoring one religion over another, but it can certainly favor religion over non-religion. I don’t make any claim to be an expert in the law or the Constitution, but that claim strikes me as being, in legal parlance, “bullshit.” Even before the third amendment sent to the states became the first one ratified (there were twelve amendments sent to the states; the first never passed and the second eventually became the 27th Amendment, and the other ten became the Bill of Rights), there existed a clause barring religion from playing a part in our government. Article VI clearly states “…but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” How then, can one argue, should our laws should be based on the Bible if it’s unconstitutional to require anyone to prove they believe the Bible to be something that should be the basis of our laws? I certainly don’t think it should be. Have you actually read it? It’s horrifying! It’s a form of child abuse to teach children it’s the truth. The same for any deity-based religious text. Prove to me that gods exist before you start telling me I have to do what you claim they say. But you can’t presuppose the existence of gods and claim that as your proof. Nor can you claim that only something like a god can produce everything we see around us, because that would be the same thing. First prove gods exist, then prove they made everything around us. Not the other way around. Don’t say only a god could produce everything around us, so that proves they must exist. Scientists have been debunking that for centuries. Nor can you make the extraordinary claim that gods exist but that it’s up to me to prove you wrong, so in the meantime I have to follow your god’s laws. There are so many flaws in the belief that gods exist, let alone that one or more of them created everything, that it simply defies logic to believe it’s true. And please, don’t tell me my disbelief is because I lack faith. Faith is the rejection of facts, evidence, and experience in favor of believing what one wishes to be true. To say something is true simply because you have faith that it is true is to literally reject logic and reason and say it’s true because you say so. Well, that’s not good enough for me. If you’re going to tell me I have to follow the laws laid down in your deity-based religious text, then I require proof that the deity on which your religious text is based actually exists and will do me harm if I don’t follow those laws. Is that really too much to ask? It’s not enough for you to tell me what your religious texts say will happen, because you still haven’t proven to me that your religious texts are based on anything real. In recent years, the Church of Scientology has been exposed as a giant scam. Nobody seriously believes our bodies were invaded by extraterrestrial beings from a planet billions of miles away. I mean, the entire story line is ridiculous, and I think most people would agree. So why are deity-based creation stories any more credible? Because you say they are? Can you imagine what would happen if someone tried to make Scientology the official religion is the United States and forced everyone to practice it? Well that is exactly what the founders of the United States, under the US Constitution, feared. Did you know that before the United States came along, every nation had an official religion? The USA was the first one to say, “We’re not going to do that. We’re not going to say one religion is better than any other. And we’re not going to say you have to practice one particular religion, or that you can’t practice certain other religions. We’re not going get into any of that at all. You are free to practice whichever religion you wish, or even no religion at all.” And that’s the part Conservative Christians like Associate Justice Scalia and Chief Justice Moore get wrong.

Nobody can be required by law to do anything just because a religion requires it of its adherents. There may be perfectly valid non-religious reasons to lass a law banning something, and those have to be the ones cited as justification. The one thing you’ll find in common with such valid laws is that they follow a principle common to many religions but also to non-religious philosophies alike. And it’s a principle most atheists you’ll ever meet follow: Treat other people the way you would want them to treat you. You don’t want someone to be able to murder you? Then make it a crime to murder someone. You don’t want someone to be able to steal your stuff, then make it a crime to take other people’s possessions. This has nothing to do with religion, or what reward or punishment (if any) one might have to endure after one dies, it’s simply the right thing to do. I am amazed at how many people distrust atheists. In fact, there are seven states where atheists are barred by law from holding public office. Those laws are unconstitutional, of course, and must eventually be struck down even if they’re never enforced. For reasons surpassing logic, people seem to believe that it’s impossible to have a moral code without a belief in God. This is nonsense. If the only thing that makes you do the morally right thing is the belief that you’ll be rewarded or punished after you’re dead, then you really don’t want to do the morally right thing, do you? I don’t believe in an afterlife, or a reward for good people or a punishment for bad ones. I try to treat other people the way I would like them to treat me because it’s the right thing to do. I’m 100% positive that it won’t make any difference to me one way or the other what happens to me after I’m dead because I won’t be around to experience it. And if you want to wave your religious books in my face and tell me I’ll suffer eternal damnation for not believing what you do, understand that the only thing preventing me from taking your religious book out of your hand and smashing you in the face with it is my morals, the ones you say I can’t possibly have because I lack a belief in God.

UPDATE: Associate justice Antonin Scalia was found dead at his ranch in Texas. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/article/Senior-Associate-Justice-Antonin-Scalia-found-6828930.php?

I will not celebrate the death of any man, but I will not weep for this one.

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to make fun of religious nutjobs like Moore and Scalia, or discuss anything else you wish..

The Watering Hole, Friday February 12, 2016 – Music Night

Valentine’s Day?

One of the all time great love songs.

 

The Watering Hole; Friday February 12 2016; Fear The Bern!!

“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity;
and I’m not sure about the universe.”
(Albert Einstein)

Apparently Iowa and New Hampshire have substantially elevated Bernie Sanders’ candidacy in the eyes of a bunch of those vocal right wing nutcases. Not sure what it is that fuels the typical wingnut loudmouth, whether it’s irrational fear or ordinary stupidity. Maybe some of each? That would explain a lot.

Anyway, here are a small handful of recent vocal nonsensicals which make a pretty solid case for the three (wingnut-only) levels of dumb, dumber, or dumbest ever. You choose!

Alex Jones: Bernie Sanders ‘Is The Final Plague’ Upon America

Alex Jones once again lit into Bernie Sanders and his supporters, this time warning that the Vermont senator represents “the final plague” that will bring down America. . . .

“You won’t learn from history. You won’t learn from the nightmare of socialism and collectivism and communism when it puts all these nobodies on top of you who revel in black uniforms and checkpoints and making your wife have sex with them so you can have a job.”

‘First They Came For The Rich’: Michael Savage Predicts Bernie Sanders Will Start Killing Americans (as Savage borrows an idea or two from Martin Niemöller):

. . . conservative talk radio host Michael Savage voiced his rage over . . . the growing popularity of Bernie Sanders.

“First they came for the rich, but you were not rich and you did not stand up for the rich; then they came for the middle class, but you didn’t stand up for the middle class because you were not even of the middle class; and then when they started to come up for the poor there was no one else to stand up for you because everyone else was taken out.”

That wasn’t quite enough for Michael the Wiener, so he added this:

Michael Savage: Bernie Sanders’ Wife ‘Looks Like Stalin’s Housekeeper’

“When I saw the beautiful Trump family on the stage last night, I said, ‘America is back again.’ I said, ‘Camelot is back again.’ I said, ‘My God, wouldn’t it be beautiful to have a first lady like Mrs. Trump? Wouldn’t it be beautiful to have a first family like the Trump family?’

“Can you imagine what this county would look like if Bernie Sanders became president? His wife looks like Stalin’s housekeeper. And if you want an America with a first lady that walks around looking like Stalin’s housekeeper, well my friends, vote for Bernie Sanders.”

I don’t know what Stalin’s housekeeper looked like, but I seriously doubt she was anywhere near as cool as Jane O’Meara Sanders! Bernie’s got MY vote for sure!!

Louie Gohmert: We Got Sanders Because We Let ‘Hippies From The ’60s’ Become Teachers

“. . . we let some of the hippies from the ‘60s who created such chaos then start teaching the teachers, and teaching them how great socialism is and just rewriting history and keeping them from realizing socialism has never worked, it will never work in this world, in this life, because if you’re going to pay everybody the same thing then they’re going to quit working.”

And here’s Glenn Beck’s prediction of the ultimate consequence for all of us if someone like Sanders should be the voter’s choice instead of God Cruz:

Glenn Beck Says Only Ted Cruz Can Save America From Revolution

“. . . the election of a ‘socialist’ like Bernie Sanders . . . will inevitably result in revolution engulfing America.

“You don’t have to believe me. I’d ask you to read history, I’d ask you to do your own homework. I tell you these things and I usually tell you these things with most of the audience and definitely all of the educated class making fun of me. I’ve done this a million times; I’m right probably 80 percent of the time on these big things where I stand on them, maybe a higher percentage. I know, because I read history.”

Glenn Beck notes that he’s right probably 80 percent of the time on these big things. Who knew?? Guess I’ve  only watched him or read him that other 20% of the time when he’s always wrong. Oh well. Live and learn.

In fairness to idiot loudmouths everywhere, though, I feel duty bound to toss them the Biblical bone verse that perfectly describes the ultimate consequence of such brashly stupid behavior.

He that digeth a pit shall fall into it.
(Ecclesiastes 10:8)

Actually nah, go ahead, proceed, ignore that pit fluff. Finish your pit and then jump in. Improve the quality of the world up top — Bernie’s world!

OPEN THREAD

 

 

The Watering Hole; Thursday Februaury 11 2016; Nut after Nut after Nut . . .

The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be;
and that which is done is that which shall be done: and
there is no new thing under the sun.
(Solomon in Ecclesiastes, King James version)

No new thing under the sun indeed. Below, five Nuts ‘speak their mind’ as absolute proof of Solomon’s ancient premise, and as proof of yet another (presumed?) Biblical premise, duly highlighted.

Sandy Rios: Beyoncé Ushering In The Antichrist With Her ‘Black Racism’ And ‘Lawlessness’

“It’s just in-your-face black racism. And also cop hatred.”

“Of course, if we undermine the law and order of our country, we will, and probably are, descending into lawlessness, and those of us that understand scripture know that that is a sign of the Last Days. The Man of Lawlessness will reign. Lawlessness, the breakdown in respect and honor. And so Beyoncé, who could be such an example to women everywhere, and I don’t care black or white, conducting herself with dignity with all that God has given her, her beauty and her natural talents, instead twisting it into something that is very ugly and very profane.”

Alex Jones: Liberals Love It When ‘Jihadis’ Rape And Murder Women

“The left teaches in schools self-loathing, self-hating, where your identity is hating yourself, so when someone rapes or stabs a woman, it is a beautiful thing because it is a German or it’s a French woman being stabbed, she deserves this.”

Liberals “smile” at the crimes committed by “jihadis,” he said, because they have a “mental illness” and “hate Jesus.”

Pat Robertson: Obama Destroying America As We Near The End Times

“He is dangerous, he is really dangerous,” Robertson said of Obama. “But whether or not he can destroy this country in the next few months that he’s got ahead of him — his people will saddle us with so many regulations. We’re looking at a serious, serious economic collapse with no driver, no country strong enough to take on the burdens of the world unless the United States mans up and does it.

“God Almighty is on the throne. His purposes will stand, regardless of the Iranians, regardless of the Sunnis and the Shias, regardless of the Soviets, regardless of who wants to hurt who, God is going to have His way and it will come to pass as the Bible says it will.”

Michele Bachmann Says Progressive Taxation Causes People To Violate The Ten Commandments

Bachmann warned that a progressive income tax is unbliblical because it encourages the government to tax the rich to benefit the poor, which makes people covet their neighbor’s possessions in violation of the Tenth Commandment.

“Just look at any campaign commercial on TV,” Bachmann said. “It’s appealing to the lower interests of man and it appeals to the American people to violate the Tenth Commandment. We are told, don’t covet; in other words, don’t be jealous and don’t want what your neighbor has. Your neighbor had to work for what he has and don’t be jealous of your neighbor, get out and work yourself. Instead, politicians say, ‘Oh no, no, your neighbor is rich because he stole it from you.’ That’s not true, it’s a lie, and so does anyone benefit from that thinking? Absolutely not. The Bible is exactly right.“

And for good measure, one more that should top things off:

Heidi Cruz: Ted Running To ‘Show This Country The Face Of The God That We Serve’

[According to Heidi Cruz] “this Christian God that we serve is the foundation of our country” and people need to be reminded that “Christians are loving people, are nonjudgmental people, but there is right and wrong, we have a country of law and order, there are consequences to actions and we must all live peaceably in our own faiths under the Constitution.

“When I thought about doing it for our country, it became very clear to me that our family must be in this race. And it also became clear to me that we are at a cultural crossroads in our country and if we can be in this race to show this country the face of the God that we serve — this Christian God that we serve is the foundation of our country, our country was built on Judeo-Christian values, we are a nation of freedom of religion, but the God of Christianity is the God of freedom, of individual liberty, of choice and of consequence.

“And I think that’s something that this country really needs to be reminded of, is that Christians are loving people, are nonjudgmental people, but there is right and wrong, we have a country of law and order, there are consequences to actions and we must all live peaceably in our own faiths under the Constitution. And Ted is uniquely able to deliver on that combination of the law and religion.”

Whew. There. That should be enough to set the world on fire. No worries, though, because Michele Bachmann absolutely nailed it when she pointed out that The Bible is exactly right,  esp. when it shouts out universal truths for all to hear, such as

“And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon;
as it is written”
(John 12:14)

Oops. Errr, sheesh. How the hell did THAT happen! So sorry! Here, THIS is the one I meant to use — to highlight the concept of Bachmann’s Biblical inerrancy thesis:

“. . . the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice
forbad the madness of the prophet.”
(II Peter 2:16)

There, that’s better. A quotable line from ‘Two Peter.’ The perfect summation of Wingnuttistanian . . . ummm . . . Principles?? OK. Sure. Why not. Good word.  Also solid proof that

The Bible is exactly right.

Sigh.

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole: 2/10/16: Daylight Slavings Time

In a disparate bid to stay relevant, GOP hopeful and Goodyear Blimp wannabe Governor Chris Christie announced a plan to change time. Not 1985 DeLorean change time, but a way his State will change the way time is measured.

Beginning with the onset of Daylight Savings Time, New Jersey will switch to a 10-hour day. That is, each 24 hour day will be divided into ten one-hour units. Each hour will consist of 100 minutes, and each minute will have 100 seconds.

“It’s a much easier way to keep track of time” the governor said, noting that with the ten-hour day, no one would have to count to twelve, or divide by sixty. “I mean, think about it. A quarter of a dollar equals 25 cents, but a quarter of an hour only equals 15 minutes? That’s nuts.”

The governor went on to explain that the change in measuring time will in no way affect the American worker. “An 8 hour day will still be an 8 hour day. And workers will still be entitled to overtime after 8 hours in a day or 40 hours in a week.”

When front-runner Donald Trump heard of Christie’s plan, he immediately jumped on the bandwagon, vowing to make weeks only 5 days long.

OPEN THREAD.

Have at it.

 

The Watering Hole, Tuesday February 9, 2016 – Environmental News and Food Politics

Environmental statements of the presumptive nominees (my presumption at this point in electoral time).

 

Marco Rubio – The Privatizer

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Marco_Rubio_Environment.htm

 

Hilary Clinton – The Big Government works ‘if we just tweak it’ candidate

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Environment.htm

 

 

Discuss…

 

Plus any tidbits you get from the NH primary.

 

Art credit: The best I could do is refer you to this gamer’s/developer’s site:

indieb.com