As a fan of both Guns & Roses as well as of the modern Chinese economy, I have to say I’m surprised that the former’s democracy came before the latter. I’ll admit that I believed that once the Chinese created a more market-oriented economy that they’d follow it up with social reform.
C’est la vie, I was wrong. I do believe that China is opening up slowly, but once again Axl Rose undermined me.
Check out the song Chinese Democracy while it is still up on Youtube.
Today’s winner for the prestigious “Religious Nut of the day” is Ray Comfort. I have actively followed his blog at Atheist Central. I’d love to say that he is well-meaning, but he is not. He is an active proselytizer and has been for for nearly 40 years.
Unlike most Christians, he goes straight after Atheists. For this, I have to commend him. While living in Texas and Korea, I have been proselytized numerous times. As a social experiment, I have told these missionaries that I am a Jew and an Atheist in order to see the differing results. When I tell the person that I am Jewish, I typically get a lot of information about the lord and savior Jesus Christ; however when I tell people that I am an Atheist most people give me a dirty look and steer clear. Ray Comfort though is not one of those Christians, which I have to respect.
On the other hand, his evangelistic style and rational thinking lead us to the “Religious Nut” portion of the headline. He claims to respond to the questions proposed by Atheists, but he really just reverts back to the old idea that Atheists should be forced to disprove fully the Christian god. He often goes on and on about how Atheists and scientists can’t show what happened at the big bang or what happens after death. This is true, but neither can Christians or Theists of any nature answer that question with any validity. When those dead-ends fail, he goes on about such inane topics such as that morality doesn’t exist without a god or how evolution doesn’t have beneficial mutations. He has evolved (ha!) somewhat in the sense that as he learns more and more about evolution he is able to postulate more difficult questions. Thankfully, anyone with a degree in biology from college seems to be able to answer them. Sadly, his faith forces him to continuously ask more and more questions in order to hopefully somehow find a flaw in evolution.
Anyways, I would have more sympathy for the man if he wasn’t so irrationally condescending. But smug arrogance in imaginary beings combined with the inability to learn has made Ray Comfort the “Religious Nut of the Day”
Some Libertarians I know believe that Obama will be a moderate on Economic policies. They hope that Obama will follow in Bill Clinton’s path as offering a “Third-way” strategy. While this sort of reasoning seems fair considering that most of the current left-wing parties in developed countries have moderated their stances, I do not believe this is the case for Barack Obama. In fact, I believe that Barack Obama offers a dangerous turn from the previously acceptable Democratic Party approach that was taken by Bill Clinton.
According to the National Journal, Obama consistently votes with his party nearly all the time. In 2007, for example, he voted with the Democrats on 65 out of 66 votes which were considered partisan. This made him the most liberal senator according to their methodology. In the two preceeding years, he was ranked the 10th and 16th most liberal Senator. There are a few flaws to the design of the National Journal’s study, such as the degree or reason why they voted; however it can not be denied that Barack Obama was an overwhelmingly partisan and leftist voter during his time in the Senate. He does not appear to promote the bi-partisanship that he offered.
While his leftist nature can’t be denied, modern American Liberalism contains more than just economic theory. Therefore, how is his record on economic issues? Well, on most economic issues he’d appear to be moderate at first glance. His tax plan, which will probably never see the light of day, would basically revert us to the upper levels of taxation seen under President Clinton. Plus, apparently the middle class would receive a larger tax cut than they had before. If that actually occurs, I’ll change my mind; however cutting taxes alone doesn’t make someone conservative economically. The two areas where Barack Obama is the least moderate appear to be in the areas of free trade and spending.
In terms of spending, Barack Obama has already proposed nearly a trillion dollars in new programs. He has offered 134 billion in college tax credits, 72 billion in “refundable tax credit for workers” and 115 billion for an expanded health care system that just increases the bloated program instead of making it a cheaper Universal health care system. None of those campaign promises would go against what he proposed in the Senate either, so unlike his planned tax cut there are some reasons we should believe him when he talks about increasing the size of the federal government. Obama has also gone on the record stating that we’re likely to increase the federal deficit even further in the next few years, which surely doesn’t represent a conservative economic ideal. We’re pretty much looking at another 4 years of Bush’s failed “spend and spend some more” politics with Obama.
As for free trade, Barack Obama has been very clever in his wording. He doesn’t want to be perceived as against globalization since that would hurt his support amongst business owners and those who understand international economics; however Obama has been against pretty much every free trade agreement from the start. In his debates, he has stated his opposition to the Korean FTA. Similarly, he voted against CAFTA because he “cannot look them in the eyes and tell them that their government is doing a single thing” to help those who lose their jobs to people in Central America. Of course, free trade creates more and better jobs, but thats conveniently forgotten. Obama lets his true reasons for going against free trade slip occasionally, when he begins to remark that we are losing manufacturing jobs to places that don’t hold the same work standards that we do, IE that the unions don’t want to their high paying jobs to be lost so that the rest of the people can buy cheaper goods. Barack’s opposition to free trade, which has been pretty constant and resolute, is not based on minute differences but a vast, philosophical opposition.
There are many other ways that Barack Obama’s economic policies are not centrist; however those are minor in my opinion. Obama’s desire for increased social programs as well as his opposition to free trade are proof enough that he is venturing away from the Third Way promoted by Clinton and Blair. The next 4 years will look more like LBJ (or Bush for that matter) than Clinton.
The previous entry was my favorite Korean story, and it sadly did not win first place. However, the following story did win first. It wasn’t necessarily the best-written story; however it was in my opinion the scariest and truly embodied the spirit of Halloween. Perhaps Ill throw the best written story at you tonight or tomorrow just to show you how good some students are, but for now, here is the first place winner
Near my house, there was a forest that blocking with fense. My father said “In forest, there is a cemetary. Don’t go into forest. There is danger”
One day night, I was sleeping. But soon, I woke up because there was lighting from forest. So I had curiosity. I went into the forest. In forest, there is really cemetary. And I saw phosphorous light. Then rotten hand came out from tomb. That was a zombie. I was so scared. So I ran to my home.
Zombie follow me very quickly. And I caught to Zombie…. I woke up from nightmare. My body was met with a cold sweat. I was relief and saw window but there was a zombie that smiled at me.
Yeah, not the best grammar and all that but it was well-written in the sense that it had an intro, a middle, and a nice conclusion. 2nd place also had those qualities, but wasn’t about zombies. What can I say, Im petty
For those of you who don’t know, I am an English teacher at a public school here in Korea. While it isn’t the most glamourous job, it does provide for many opportunities for humor. During a particularly dull week at the end of October, I offered the students the chance to participate in an English scary story contest. To my surprise, about 10% of the kids actually took me up on the offer. Perhaps it was the promise of American candy, or the mentioning that it was “homework”, but a few kids actually did a damn good job. Of course, there were also kids whose grasp of English limited them a bit.
Here is the first of many English scary stories:
Man: What?!!! Help me!!!
Zombie: I kill you!!! kkkk
Man: Who are you!
Zombie: I’m zombie ~
Man: What? Zombie? help me!~~
— After —
Man #2: What? help ~ !
Man: <blood>
Zombie: kkkk
So there you have it, a Ku-Klux-Klan… King zombie attack. Im obviously teaching my students well.
The toughest question for myself, as an atheist, is how I deal with those I love who die. Thankfully, I have only had one dog and one grandmother pass away during my time here on Earth, but even those two incidents caused me great emotional strain. Ever since I declared that I was an Atheist at 13 and understood what it meant at 19, the thought of my loved ones dying has kept me up at night worried.
Over the years, I have come to grips with the idea. This is not due to some intellectual break-through but more because I have become desensitized to the thought. It becomes overwhelming if you stress about it too much. After not having to deal with the topic for about 5 years, it has become apparent that my beloved dog of 14 years may die. He is the first animal that I have seen grow from a puppy to an old man. You gotta love pets, but man, they make you realize the inevitability of death. Everytime that I have to say goodbye to my dog, I believe that its the last time I’ll ever see him. Im hoping that he can hang on for another month so I can get back home and say goodbye to him again. It is such an incredible pain having to leave Texas and not look back for the fear that it’ll be the last time that I see my ol’ dog.
Anyways, I listened to the Skeptics Guide to the Universe Podcast from July 23rd. Yeah, I know, I am a bit late on the date. Their guest, George Hrab, is an Atheist singer and podcast host. He had to come to terms with the death of his loved pet as well. One of the main components to his coping was to avoid the belief that his dog was in a better place or that he’ll ever see his dog again. Atheists show their true colors when presented with death. It is much easier to have paranormal hope; however it is much more rational to know that your dog or family member is dead and will never come back.
George Hrab searched to find any positive that could come from the situation. The only solitude he found was that atleast his dog would not have to miss him. Thats it. Thats the only comfort.
Atleast he won’t have to miss me.
From the Volga Germans Wikipedia page, which is coincidently your Wikipedia page of the day
“Catherine the Great” published manifestos in 1762 and 1763 inviting Europeans, except Jews, to immigrate and farm Russian lands while maintaining their language and culture.
Punk ass bitch. We don’t want your Russian land anyways. By the way surfboard, nice double chin
Barack Obama’s most criticized, and I believe best, foreign policy idea has been to meet with “rogue” nations without preconditions. Those who believe that meeting with nations such as Syria and Iran would set back diplomatic efforts are missing the big picture. The only nation in the axis of evil that we have made honest and true progress with is North Korea. That is because North Korea is the only nation that we agreed to meet with and act rationally instead of posturing and threatening. Anyone who has dated before knows that threats rarely work. I can count the amount of times on one hand where saying “you better do this or else” actually worked. Why can’t we apply that principle to foreign policy?
It can be argued that the progress with North Korea isn’t genuine; for example, you can point to how quickly their government was able to turn-around Yongbyon (?????) after they started to shut it down. Plus, North Korea has a history of trying to balance major powers so they can get the best of all worlds. Still, it can’t be denied that the situation between North Korea and America is better than our relationship with Iran. I believe that it is because of our willingness to negotiate with North Korea compared to our previous techniques of isolation and consistant belligerence.
Certainly, some nations can’t be reasoned with. I do not believe that a further appeasement of the Taliban would’ve worked per se. But that doesn’t mean that the strategy of negotiations wouldn’t work with other nations. Venezuela is one such nation that an easement of relations would be a boon for both countries. Despite having vastly different economic systems, there is no reason why Venezuela and the United States couldn’t be neighborly in their relations. Venezuela’s main frustrations with the United States lie in the Washington Consensus and our military involvement in South America. Those two factors could easily be worked out with both nations and result in a detente.
Personally, I am rather pleased with Obama’s sticktuitiveness on this policy point. I hope that he will continue to push for talks with nations such as Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and even perhaps the Hamas terrorist group. That way we can see some true progress in international relations.
I was frequenting one of my blogs that I normally hit, Baseball Crank, which breaks down the federal spending and revenue each year based on who is in the House, Senate, and the Executive office. While the Baseball Crank typically leans Republican, the data that he presents shows that by far the best combination for a government is having a Democratic POTUS and a Republican Congress.
The big question is why that is. Obviously, an obstructed government will prove to have more obstacles. When the government is unified, it creates a situation where the party leaders are able to pass legislation in which they aren’t held accountable. For instance, the Republicans in the early 90s were able to throw together legislation greatly increasing the military budget as well as the other pet projects that they’ve wanted to pass to appease their base. Despite their insistence that they are the party of small government, the Republicans passed health care legislation that really didn’t fit in their platform solely so they could maintain the lock that they have on senior citizens. Therefore, when the government is all one party their principles will usually go about the way-side when it comes to legislation that can improve their standing amongst certain sectors.
If that is the case, how come an obstructed government will increase the size of the government when the Republicans control the executive but not the Democrats? In my opinion, it is pretty simple. Despite the belief that the power of the president is huge, most of the spending is led by the Congress. The president does have tremendous control over the military spending, but not over domestic spending. Republican presidents have always promised to be a guard against increased discretionary spending; however they tend to cave when they realize the extent of their reach. Reagan has always been thought of as decreasing spending, but he actually increased it. If you have followed President Bush over the last 8 years you can tell that he has no qualms with spending. Therefore, the only possible combination that moderately controls the government is a Republican congress with a Democratic president.
Heres to hoping that 2012 finds us with Obama getting re-elected with stunning gains by the Republicans in the house.
Scribe fire is an excellent service that you should use. Even a lazy bum, such as myself, can figure it out. You let it do all the work for you and then just let it run its course. Check it out at http://www.scribefire.com/ . Also for your viewing pleasure, I have included a picture of Ryan and one of his students. If you’re an English teacher, you should take advantage of his teaching methods.
Powered by WordPress