What a Difference a Mind Makes

You know it’s really funny. Prepare you face for it. To laugh that is.

When I talk about faith or religion here, it brings out the new atheists and their smarmy yak-yak about believing in fairy tales. When I talk about faith or religion on my actual religion blog, Walking in the Shadows, I sometimes get folks who deign to explain to me that I’m not practicing the right kind of Christianity from their point of view.

Yesterday, I was asked, after making a number of statements regarding various fairly technical aspects of Christian theology (atonement theory, faith/works), the sort of things that some of us love to discuss, whether I was a “follower” of Jesus.

I guess it caught me oddly since I can’t imagine why anyone would spend all that much time on a subject of which they had no interest. But then I thought of a few rather well-known scholars who had started their studies in faith, and then lost it, and remained in the discipline. So I guess it wasn’t so odd.

Which brought me to the well-known principle that on just about every subject known to man and woman, people see things very differently. To this person’s mind at least, because I didn’t believe as she did, I must not be a follower of Jesus as she was. There was one way to follow Jesus, and I wasn’t doing it.

Similarly, whether it be economics or climate change, or any of a host of human and worldly problems, you discover that people have views that seem idiotic to you. Yet, when you talk to them, they have the same passion as you do. They are just as sure. Well, I guess that’s not totally true. I always figure that I’m never totally sure about much of anything. Doubt to me is part of the package. Those who are diametrically opposed to what I think, they seem to be very sure.

Therein lies the rub as Shakespeare was wont to say. The “follower of Jesus” if asked, would assure me that her belief is absolute, without question. That seems to me to be the total opposite of faith. For to me, faith is such in the face of doubt. It’s a choosing to believe even when there is no proof that you are right, just no proof that you are wrong.

It led me to conclude that that is probably true about most people who are given to being “absolutely sure”.  I’m also engaged with a very reactionary type who is “very sure” there is no such thing as global warming. Even though logically he can’t be, since he has no training in any science even remotely related to the subject. He is adamant that he is right, because the people he aligns himself with say what he wants to be true.

A scientist will tell you that you can’t be absolutely sure that the sun will rise tomorrow. Something catastrophic could always happen. Is it true that only the reactionary right are “sure” about things? I wonder.

I’m not completely sure where this comes from. One can refer to the fundamentalist mind. People think it refers to super conservative church people, but it actually is a mindset. It refers to a person who likes things in neat little boxes, all tidy and a whole world gets constructed of rights and wrongs. Once they have established this nice world, they can finally relax, they have all the answers. Nobody is allowed to jeopardize that with actual facts to the contrary. They must be defeated, and they are, by naming them as suspect. They are “purveyors of lies”, they are “Marxists” or “socialists” or “one-world government” nuts. They are hucksters conspiring  to obtain grants based on known falsehoods, for the “money”. (of course nobody explains how tens of thousands are all in on this conspiracy and waste their careers getting grants to do things they know already are false). Nobody explains the lack of logic of it all.

One can refer to self-interest, and that explains a lot too. When you poke at the angry all too sure person, they generally erupt in a retort of “we’re going to be taxed to death, and all for nothing!” That is the crux of the issue when you puncture the pus-filled wound they carry around with them. They hate taxes, hate everything they perceive is keeping them from retaining every dime they make.

That is why the GOP mantra is so attractive. They not only support the angry right and it’s desire to pay less taxes, they give them all the reasoning as to why they need not feel guilty about it either. If you show them statistics that prove that raising the minimum wages doesn’t result in an uptick in the unemployment numbers and that it results in raising up the wages of all workers, they retort with a firm “no it doesn’t, all it does it deny poor black kids a chance at a job, and perpetuate poverty, which is all Democrats want because then they have a ready-made electorate who want those handouts.”

It’s so nice when people tell you aren’t racist, or sexist, or homophobic, or wrong period. It’s nice to be told that you are right in denying full rights to gay couples because “God wants it that way.” Nice to deny SNAP to women and children because it just “encourages laziness and relying on the government”. It’s nice to  leave the planet in a mess to the next generation because a few opportunists are willing to assure you that it’s really okay and you shouldn’t be scammed by and forced to pay more taxes to encourage green technology.

So, add another point to how to determine when you are hearing the truth, or when you are hearing what somebody wants you to believe for their own purposes. Are they sure? If they are, and they don’t have the background to make that determination, look for something else at play, and tread carefully when you make your decision of what you believe.

Belief and surety are not the same.

How Do You Decide?

I’ve mentioned more than once that I’ve been engaged in debate on Facebook with people who went to my high school, on a variety of topics.

As you might expect there are two camps, the liberals versus the conservatives. As you might assume, there are any number of shades of grey.

It got me to thinking. Yes, we are THERE again.

The Contrarian asks me occasionally why I bother. “You will convince no one, you know that don’t you?” he muses.

Yes I know that. Here is my list:

1. There are lots of people who read but don’t comment because they are interested but not passionate. My comments may provide the last piece of the puzzle that enables them to form an opinion. They more people who are involved in the process the better.
2. I learn a great deal myself. Arguments lead me not to empty talking points but to actual research, and so I learn refinement of my opinion as well as to create a more cogent argument for what I believe.
3. In attempting to figure out why those who disagree with me believe what they believe, I’m forced to confront my own reasons for believing what I believe. Sometimes I find that my reasons aren’t worthy of supporting that opinion–in a word, they are self-serving. I can adjust  my opinion accordingly.

It’s this latter point that I wish to address.

I’m inclined to think of myself as something of a Renaissance woman. Now before you commence to laughing out loud, let me proceed. I am such only in the sense that my interests are very far-ranging and always have been. Along the way, I’ve managed to learn more than the average person about a whole lot of things from cosmology to paleontology, to biblical studies and theology, and so forth. I am not a Renaissance woman in the sense of having expertise in any of these, just an intense interest and the willingness to learn.

That said, this is how I approach forming an opinion. I will use the example of an area of biblical study called Markan priority. Markan priority simple states that the Gospel of Mark was probably the first gospel written that has come down to us. It posits that both Matthew and Luke used Mark, their own independent information, and a source called “Q” to form their own gospels which were written 10-15 years after Mark’s.

I’ve read numerous books on various aspects of biblical studies, some couple of hundred at least, and I have studied under three professors with PH.D’s in the field. I’ve attended dozens of workshops and adult education classes on various biblical issues as well. So I consider myself above average in knowledge.

Yet, I am no expert. Far from it. I cannot read Koine Greek which is essential to actually study of the bible on a professional level. So how do I arrive at an opinion?

You may first wonder why anybody cares. I can tell you that they do; there is a hotly contested debate over this issue. Why?  Because to a fundamentalist, not only the words in the bible, but their very organization within the bible is something God ordered. Open any bible and you will find that Matthew is the first gospel you come to. To disturb that by suggesting that Mark was written first is tantamount to calling God a liar.

So I have read all the arguments pro and con on Markan priority. I understand them well enough. I am aware that at this time, there is a clear and fairly overwhelming majority who believe that for all kinds of reasons, Mark was probably written first. All kinds of other things make sense when this is assumed. They make no sense by and large when you don’t.

So my opinion, given that I am no expert myself, is that the better opinion is that Mark was written first.

This is how I arrive at opinions on any field of study that I am not an expert in.

Sometimes, I might even wish that the things were otherwise. When it comes to theories about the future of the universe, I’m compelled to accept that the majority opinion is that the universe is continuing its expansion from the “big bang” and that that expansion is accelerating. I’d rather believe that the universe is in a “steady state” meaning it’s stable. For some reason, that’s comforting to me. But I feel that I have no basis to buck the experts who spend their lives studying this stuff, and like any real scientist, aren’t going to pursue dead ends intentionally. There is not glory in pursuing obvious falsehoods.

So while an opinion might make me feel better, I cannot maintain it for that reason alone.

Similarly, I’d love to believe that global warming isn’t true. It would make me feel a lot better about the future certainly. But I’m constrained to believe what 97% of all climate scientists tell me–that humans are indeed part of the equation of global warming and that we need to do what we can to turn it around before it is too late–if that is at all possible.

What troubles me deeply is the degree to which average people, who have no expertise in the area of climate (just like me) are passionately in the camp of the 3% claiming that global warming is a hoax. Since they cannot possibly be following the same process of opinion forming as myself, what system are they using?

I’m afraid that they are buying into the hoax theory simply because they wish that to be the answer. Either because they feel guilty that they have been a part of the problem, or because they don’t want to pay (taxes) to attempt to solve the problem. If you admittedly aren’t an expert, how do you “choose” one set of arguments provided to you by  those who have a very high stake in their position, i.e., gas and oil interests and those they pay to “study” the issue?

Is my model of opinion formation wrong? Am I missing something here? I’m puzzled, and when I am, I figure you guys can bail me out. So straighten out my aching head, for I’m confused.

Wackos of the World Unite: You Have Nothing to Lose But Moronic Thinking

I was recently called a wacko. Nothing could be truer and if the person who so named me, had known me well, I would have laughed in agreement. But he knows nothing but a smidgen of my politics, and his opprobrium was limited to that fact alone.  To that sir, I take umbrage!

I have heard, and it seems to be folk wisdom, that one becomes more conservative with age. I guess it stems from an accumulation of anecdotal observances of friends and family as they age.

It may well be true.

I know it was nearly true of me.

At one point in my life, I found my life in a place that was not pleasing. I was living in an urban setting in a city known for violence. I was tired of house break-ins, and all the petty crime that life entailed. I was tired of my job, tired of the people I worked with and we were embroiled in a fight within our organization over wages and rights.

And I found myself slipping into conservative mode. I wanted out, and that required savings, and anything that impinged on my ability to save money was something I was against.

Life got better. And it continued to be so.

I realized something as life got sweeter. My normal liberalism was returning. My life is great today. And my liberalism is flaming, in fact I’m not sure I’m not sliding well into anarchism. (please do look that up before you report me to the FBI–I’m a Chomsky type anarachist and I’m just beginning that journey of discovery, so don’t hold me to it. Being the eclectic I am, I am always trying to learn something new. I almost became a nun for goodness sake!)

Which suggests that something more is at work here.

I’ve become involved in some discussions with old school mates as of late. The discussions have often involved issues of the day. And I find a very curious thing. Perhaps I’m reading the tea leaves wrong, but well, judge for yourself.

I view the Tea Party as a loose amalgamation of disparate spirits. There are your fiscal deficit hawks. There are your, don’t tax me (but do fix the pot holes). There are the “it smacks of socialism/fascism/communism” to me even though I can’t actually tell you which is which, but I don’t like it. There are your basic racists and any anti-Democratic group sounds good to me given that THAT guy is in the White House types. There are your basic survivalists who just hate government, but are also itching to shoot it up. There are your religionists/fundamentalists who think the US of A ought to be based on the bible as they interpret it, along with all their ideas of social living arrangements made mandatory by God, speaking through them. There are probably more.

It makes for a messy group.

But in discussions, I find that those who are most impossible to engage in anything other than sound bites direct from Breitbots, Daily Caller, Blaze, WND, and the ever reliable bellicose grifters, Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, and so on, are people who over time, you perceive to be just really really unhappy individuals. They have fallen into their conservationism as a defense to their miserable lives.

I paint this portrait with the proviso that not all need apply, but as they say, if you find yourself answering yes to three or more, you may have a problem that is leading you to be a Conservative:

1. You are divorced or separated, and you feel that you are not at fault, having spent your life working to provide for your spouse who is an ungrateful _________.
2. You have no education past high school, or if you do, it was toward a trade or low-level technical job.
3. You are self-employed and have no more than six people who work for you.
4. You have long given up an dreams of opening a second shop, franchising your business, or crossing that threshold to being a “businessman”. In other words, you still are working along with your employees.
5. You work long hours, and while you make a decent living, you still can’t afford all the things you dreamed of having at this point.
6. Every dime you pay in taxes becomes a dime that keeps you that must further away from “retirement”, and a chance to finally enjoy life. Emphasis on finally because you don’t expect to enjoy life until you have “made it”.
7. You have few hobbies or enjoyable down time, because you “don’t have time” or can’t afford it.
8. Life has definitely not turned out the way you expected it to, and you are close or at retirement age.
9. You increasingly see that most people don’t work as hard as you do, yet they “get stuff” for free because they are a minority, a woman, an undocumented worker (illegal).
10. You know that if the government didn’t take your money, you could have been wealthy like all the rich people you so admire. You’ve read all their books, and you know you are just like them.

What this all leads to is extreme anger. It’s not my fault I’m not living the life I deserve. It’s __________ fault. It’s got to be somebody’s fault you see. I just has to be. For it cannot be mine. I work too hard for it to be mine.

Of course, it begs the question that you have perhaps listened to the wrong people. I could explain that you are believing exactly what the corporate masters desire you to believe. You are blaming who they wish you to blame. You are mired in self-pity, because it is not your fault. And it truly isn’t your fault. You simply based your beliefs on those whose interest it is to keep your striving in place,  and misdirecting your anger away from them.

So I think of it as a badge of honor to be a liberal at my age. I have successfully avoided the pitfalls of self-interest in the name of what I call being human. I see the human experience as one of striving to be more human, and that means being more open and giving and sharing with the lives that surround me. There is nothing so very noble about it. It’s a constant struggle to pull away from purely selfish interest to include “the other”. I don’t always win that battle, but the struggle enhances my ability to win more than I lose. And as a citizen of planet of earth, I find that a positive step forward.

Evolution is about change over time. Try to be mindfully engaged in that process. I think God likes that. But that’s me, the wacko speaking.

Are You Seriously Insane or Only Serious. . . .Seriously?

“What we have here is a failure to communicate.”

So, I was minding my own business, just reading up on my favorite bloggers, when Denise sent me over to this hatefest called TownHall, wherein all the greats (leading off with Annie *nobody will touch that* Coulter) of ultra wacked conservatism reside. And I read this bilge by somebody called John Hawkins about how evil and super crazy all liberals are.

And I read the comments, which consisted of a long list of “yes, yes,” and “got that right” and “oh, John, you are the best” and other such drivel.

Now John said all the usual things, like:

• that liberals are hateful people (almost all of them) We get up hating, and we go to bed hating. We hate all the wrong people (them) which is proof, while they hate only the right people.
• that liberals promote race hatred at every turn. The Nazis couldn’t have done as well in creating groups to gin up hate like liberals do, even though the crazy right never uses  analogies like Nazi.
• that most liberals are immoral and therefore never have to apologize (as the right is constantly having to do) when their private immoralities become public. Conservatives are moral because they do apologize. And also liberals, having no morals, spend all their time lying about conservatives, which by definition, conservatives must refrain from (which explains why Willard is not required to tell the truth about nuthin’ since he ain’t no real conservative)
• that liberals don’t care about whether their policies actually work, it just makes them feel good to force them on people, for some reason that Hawkins can’t explain. But it’s true nonetheless. “policies that kill millions but make them feel good about themselves are a win.”
• that liberals are extremely intolerant. The entire MSM is liberal, yet they begrudge the Right a couple of puny radio shows and Fox. We don’t even know the meaning of tolerance–”Actual tolerance means that you realize people have different practices and views and even if you don’t agree, you understand that they should have the ability to live as they choose, just as you should have the leeway to live as you choose.” Liberalism is just the first step to fascism. (Except if you are gay, an immigrant, Muslim, a strong woman,  a Democrat, a liberal, progressive, 99 9/10′s of all black race card players, European, Middle Eastern -except Israeli, college student, college professor, welfare recipient, sexually active woman, Commie, socialist, evolutionist, secularist, tree-huggin’ greenies, a climate changer . . . awww heck, anything other than white!)

There.

I mean.

Okay.

Classroom please.

PROJECTION:

Psychological projection or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others originate those feelings.  .  .  .In this way, the subject may obtain ‘acquittal by his conscience.  .  .  .Projection can also be established as a means of obtaining or justifying certain actions that would normally be found atrocious or heinous. This often means projecting false accusations, information, etc., onto an individual for the sole purpose of maintaining a self-created illusion.  .  .  .Compartmentalization, splitting, and projection are ways that the ego continues to pretend that it is completely in control at all times. . . . [from Wikipedia]

Got that? And guess what?

Wanna know who is the best at this crap? The fundamentalist-authoritiarian follower. Or TeaPerson, or Ultra Right-Wing Wanger.

So, you know, you cannot talk to these folks.

¶

There is a book that just came out called The Republican Brain. It looks like a good one. The author speaks about Republican views on global warming. This has always been an odd duck for me. Why does the extreme Right hate environmentalism? Some, the fringe evangelical crazies think that Genesis settled the issue by saying that God said he would never suffer the destruction of the world again, ala The Flood. But surely that is a fringe.

So what gives?

Is it just the herd mentality of the authoritarian follower to follow the dictates of the GOP elites who receive their campaign funds from oil and gas interests and thus echo the “green technology is bad” song?

Are Republicans just idiots?

Sort of. Smart idiots would be more like it.

It turns out that the more educated you are as a Republican, the more you deny global warming. How can that be?

Research also shows that it’s a white male, Tea Party position as well.

The reasoning goes this way:

1. The conservative mind is authoritarian. It likes clean black/white dichotomies, and it likes certainty. Fear and threat are bad. Once they have an opinion, it is held against all new information.
2. The conservative mind prizes individuality, dislikes government and accepts that society is hierarchical. If humans are responsible for global warming, then their free market philosophy has failed and government will have to step in.Since this is unacceptable,  there must be a conspiracy to create a crisis in order to justify take over of economies. Scientists must be part of this, so scientists can’t be trusted.
3. The worst aspects of the conservative mind are met with a news outlet that is prepared to coddle their mis-beliefs, i.e., Fox News. Studies clearly show that Fox News watchers are the most uninformed on all issues, but clearly global warming.

So, again, we can talk with these folks.

Now you go out, and forget all the doom and gloom, and have a good day.

Related articles

• 5 Uncomfortable Truths About Liberals (nebraskaenergyobserver.wordpress.com)
• Liberal Opposition to Ryan Plan Is Delusional Demagoguery – David Limbaugh – Townhall Conservative Columnists (theconservativehillbilly.wordpress.com)
• The Myth of the American Political Intelligence Gap (esquire.com)
• The Conservative Teen (boingboing.net)
• Profiles in Liberal Ignorance, Hate, and Intolerance: 20 Examples (vocalminority.typepad.com)
• Why The Right-Wing Brain Is Dysfunctional (theageofblasphemy.wordpress.com)
• Are Hate and Fear the new american values? (drugsandotherthings.wordpress.com)

I Felt Like I Was Homer, Doh

No, no, not THAT Homer. The other Homer, the one who sailed the Mediterranean.

That is they story the Contrarian is pushing. For what that’s worth.

Okay, so this is the story.

The Contrarian tends to read my blogs in bunches. And so he acccccuuuum-ulates all the MInor little digs I make at him, and makes them a BIG DEAL.

So he insists that I set the record straight. So that is this.

A couple of days ago, I was complaining, as has been my wont for some time now that my tummy was unhappy. I have what are known as “digestive issues” and from time to time they annoy me for a few days. So anyhow, I was grousing about this, and sucking down my fourth cup of coffee, when I mused, “I wonder if in fact the full caffeine coffee is making this worse than it otherwise would be?”

Lights, camera, action.

The next thing I know, said holder of the ring of committment, was getting his wallet and checkbook and inserting same in bibs.

“Where ya goin’?” I inquired.

“To get you some D-caf.” he intoned.

“Oh, dear, I can wait, I’ll just stop drinking coffee for a bit.”

“No, the minute you mentioned it, I knew that was it. I”m going to get my sweetie some D-caf.”

And so it goes.

He left.

He returned. With ice cream drumsticks, but no coffee.

“Didn’t have any at Troy. Didn’t have any at Walker either.” he moaned.

“Well, we can get some next week.”

“No, I just came back to drop off the drumsticks, I’m off to Center Point.”

“Parker, that’s enough. No need for all that.”

“No, I going. If I’m not back in twenty minutes, then I had to go clean into Cedar Rapids.”

He left.

He returned.

He had a green container of Folgers.

“I may have to take  rest,” he shuddered. “It’s awful out there.”

“I think I traveled to hell and back. Bicycles, bicycles, bicycles everywhere. I mean they don’t even know enough to get over yet. They haven’t been hit enough times, the brush back doesn’t work. I was nearly killed on a hill when I had to go AROUND them. On a HILL of all places.”

He walked into the living room and flopped down, still muttering.

“I felt like Homer, I felt like Homer,” I heard him say again and again.

I had not the heart to ask which.

¶

 I have only one dog left in the fight. MSU is in the Sweet Sixteen. All my other teams were defeated. Sometimes in nail-biters, sometimes rather ignominiously. Such is March Madness. Such is the foul-make ‘em-foul shoot, college ball.

¶

I find that reading crap from the Right is a great sanity protector. One has to hold most strongly to one’s own in order to properly witness the evaporation of someone elses.  (by the way, that is an original quote from me. Feel free to quote me–extensively. Sherry M. Peyton, thinker extraordinaire)

¶

What would it take to buy you off? I’m not talking about the average politician who bit by bit sells his vote for enough dough to insure his own re-election. He/she salves his soul by telling himself that he is simply doing what needs to be done to remain there to do the “right” thing by the really big issues.

I’m talking about the man or woman who makes a decision to deny their very self in return for success, however defined. The ones who out-torture their torturers. The ones who will demean gender, orientation, race, ethnicity, and/or beliefs in order to be in “the club” and reap the reward, called the “American Dream.” The ones who cannot look their own in the eye any more, because of what they have done in the name of winning personal reward.

I’m reading about them in Republican Gomorrah, by Max Blumenthal. It absolutely makes your skin crawl. If other life forms have visited us, they must surely have left in disgust. To witness up close the intertwining evil is frightening, but at the most basic, it’s not an ideology so much as it is a series of petulant, damaged little men and women who want people to sit up and take notice that they are alive and prosperous. They recognize each other, and join forces all supporting each other in their personal madness, corrupted and corrupting all they touch, for this barely believed “greater good” they hope to usher in.

I should go pack some more. LOL. I’m obviously in a foul mood.

It’s Monday, I’m retired, and I still hate Mondays.

 

Boatloads of Poo Comin’ Down the Pike

Well, another week in the bag, and I feel quite literally buried in poo from the politicos among us. Thankfully, or not, we got about three inches of fluffy white that has covered everything in sight and made it all look rather clean. For the moment.

I note that Willard is giving a speech about economics today. His 59-point plan was pretty much a dud, so it’s time to do something a little more flashy. In order to do this Willard’s thinkers have secured the Ford Field, home of the Detroit Lions. Fearful that they might not be able to fill up that arena, they have toyed with a number of ways of setting it up, finally settling on placing The Willard on the 30-yard line and with some nifty camera angles, figuring it will look like all of humankind has come to listen to the wisdom that will pour forth. *Yawn*

We are told that The Willard has “reassembled” the Bush economic team. Now I feel secure. I remember that as working quite well, don’t you?

¶

The Willard decried that abstinence only wasn’t being taught in our schools enough. It’s something that has been proven to work. Except that it hasn’t. Except that it is provably not working. Except that where it is used, namely the deep South, is where the highest levels of teen pregnancy occur. And the Ragin’ Rick interjects that teen pregnancy is soaring, when it is in fact, declining. And the declining is in those states that teach a full-range sex-education, including contraceptive alternatives.

Just to set the record straight.

¶

Like just about everyone has noticed that Dr. Paul, the “principled” one in the race, is steering clear of ever criticizing The Willard. He has no just problem with criticizing Ragin’ Rick or Neutered Newt. In fact he crucifies them. And everybody is pretty darn sure that Dr. Paul and The Willard have struck some agreement. Does it have to do with the FED? Or is it more personal, like being kind to the weird-o Rand? Only time will tell. Of course both sides are shaking their heads vigorously in DENIAL. That’s convincing–no one.

¶

Said Karen Santorum: “I did always feel in my heart that God had big plans for Rick. Eventually it was there, tugging at my heart. When Obamacare passed, that was it. That put the fire in my belly.”

Awwww, ain’t that cute? And I thought the only thing her belly was good for was growing babies. God works in mysterious ways–I guess.

¶

As I mentioned the other day, you can read a copy of The Authoritarians, by Robert Altemeyber online. I thought I would share a bit here and there as I get along in it. Those who are authoritarian followers are more fearful in general that the rest of us. They were taught to be so by their parents. They see boogeymen around every corner, a crisis in the making at every turn. People are dangerous and out to get them. Now overlay this with the propensity of the GOP leadership and Fox Noise to interject FEAR as a main ingredient in all they say. Getting it now?

¶

Did you miss it? The polls poles flipped once again. I know this because the new mantra of the crazies is that Democrats are anti-science. None other than the tea-drunk Michelle Malkin has jumped on the Ragin’ Rick bandwagon. The White House has a anti-science theology that is destroying Amerika folks. Environmental-Nazis!

I think the real religious menaces are those in the White House, in the Department of Interior, at the National Park Service who pretend that they are on the side of rationality and objectivity while they are politicizing and corrupting Science for their own radical ends.

Yeah, and now can you explain to us what is their purpose in deliberately doing this Michelle with two L’s? Are they working for SATAN???????

¶

Meanwhile, the ever busy Beelzebub, dips his horns in education. Ragin’ Rick, his head usually a swim with sexual perversion, imagined and fantasized, took time to demonize the President’s attempts to help kids get to college. Why nothing but a utopian plot to groom more radical theologians of the Marxian flavor.

“I understand why Barack Obama wants to send every kid to college, because of their indoctrination mills, absolutely … The indoctrination that is going on at the university level is a harm to our country.”

Except for Liberty U I bet, huh Ragin’? (H/T to Angry Black Lady Chronicles.)

¶

Are you out of sorts? Are you too pooped to poo? Need a pick-me-up? Well, no Vitametavegimin here folks but some mighty good commentary follows:

Paul Krugman sorts out all of  Willard’s economic lies  in a NYTimes Op Ed.

“If you just cut, if all you’re thinking about doing is cutting spending, as you cut spending you’ll slow down the economy.”

Think Obama said that? Well The Willard did. And they are walkin’ back that one, fast and furiously.

Steve Benen points out all those pesky “friends” who are kinda not sometimes so “helpful” to Willard. And the worst Surrogate Award goes to:

“Santorum connects with people. Unfortunately, my guy has a hard time doing that.” (AR state party chairman and Willard backer)

And the Detroit Free Press endorsed The Willard, while pretty much disagreeing with him on everything, finally admitting that what he stands for is, ummm, kind of hard to figure out? Well, he’s better than the others anyway.

… for the past 12 months, Romney has been refashioning himself as something other than what his record suggests. He has made gestures toward economic and social radicalism, and eschewed the common sense of cooperative governing that made him a success in Massachusetts. Romney was also dead wrong when he opposed government bailouts for the auto industry (Michigan’s most vital economic engine) in late 2008. And he has since adopted a recalcitrant and, at times, revisionist defense of his position in the face of overwhelming evidence that the bailouts he opposed were necessary…. But Romney, unlike the zealous Rick Santorum, the impulsive Newt Gingrich and the backward-thinking Ron Paul, is preferable to the rest of the field. [h/t to the Commentariat for this section of links]

And with that, another day sets on the Feather. Let’s look for some laughs tomorrow shall we?

Tuesdays With Morons

Wheeeee! They are at it again. Voting. Or as we call it, “eating their spinach.” Which idiot this time?

Odds on favorite is Mittens.

Mittens reminds us all again that he wants to be president more than anything in the whole wide world. His handlers are gleefully taking credit for having reshaped “their” candidate to outperform the competition.

No more Mr. Nice-guy for the Mittens.

He went after Newt with a vengeance, and with a certain amount of enjoyment, the same pompous arrogance he used in the debate when he said if an underlying of his came to him with an idea to put a colony on the moon, he would “fire him.” Mittens likes to fire folks.

Meanwhile, Newt has responded in the way Newt responds–with equal venom. And a promise to carry the now very personal fight, on to the convention.

I think Mittens has over stepped here. Newt strikes me as a guy who once he feels personally attacked in this vicious way, will spare nothing to “take Mitt down.” Nothing will stand in the way, I suspect. He will not care. It will be about destroying Mitt.

¶

There is a really good read over at We are Respectable Negroes.  Glenn Feldman, historian and scholar, from the College of Arts and Sciences, U of Alabama, Birmingham has a book out called Painting Dixie Red: When, Where and Why and How the South Became Republican. More important he’s written an essay about it and you can read it here. Really interesting stuff.

¶

Life with dial-up. Oh I can’t tell you the joys. Yesterday, all of a sudden I couldn’t get on WordPress. No matter what avenue, it just ran and ran, and wasn’t up taking data. Finally in frustration, I went to google to see if there were reports of trouble. Eventually I made my way to the forums and started to ask questions. They were sure it was me, and told me all about my header and background not being “optimized” whatever that means.

I left with no resolution, and worried all night about what I would do, should I not get back here. Well, today I got back, but I was still running very slowly. I finally, in frustration, dumped an “adobe reader update” that I had mistakenly installed Sunday evening. (I say mistaken, since I thought it was Microsoft updates). Well, all the sudden my speed picked up.

So I guess the Adobe was running in the background and taking up my precious speed. I guess. Now my mouse is sticking. But that was happening before, and if I disconnect and reconnect, that has cleared up in the past.

Ain’t all this computer crap just a crock of crap?

¶

Now this is rich.

Remember Alabama and its draconian immigration laws?  (some of which have been halted by a federal judge) Remember how crops rotted in the field, because farmers there couldn’t find willing, let alone competent workers to pick? Well, Kansas is not gonna let that happen.

Kansas has petitioned the federal government to allow them to employ undocumented workers. They are not going to wait until the crops rot, they are planning ahead, and they know they have worker shortages.   I wonder what the old GOP has to say about that?

¶

We are heading off to the city tomorrow for our food pilgrimage. Stocking up. Such fun. I’m deep in the throes of “making my grocery list.” This is no small task when you are planning for a month. Having to make a menu for the month, then checking each recipe and noting ingredients. It’s a pain. Can’t wait until I can return to weekly shopping and a quick run to the store for X is actually a “quick” run.

¶

Pretty sad when your own side lambastes ya.

Joe Scarborough went after Mitt today about Medicare. Apparently Mormons condone lying, since Mittens has been really heavy on it. He claims, to Floridian elderly, that Obama has cut Medicare by 500 billion, all the while supporting the “Ryan plan” which would gut the program altogether. “Demagoguery” submits Joe. None of it is true.

¶

A good story about how Fox has taken over the Republican party and is now taking the GOP down the dark path to inevitable distruction. The few rational Republicans now weep in the corner, wondering what has happened.

¶

From Don in Massachusetts:

And lest anyone should accuse moi of being unfair, let’s me point you at this article by Jonathan Haidt, who studies the psychology of politics, and has some not so quite nice things to say about liberals.

He claims that conservatives have a much better handle on the American mind than do liberals.

And frankly, to a degree, I don’t disagree, though I don’t think that that makes a lot of difference. That doesn’t make it right, just true. For the moment.

There are plenty in academia who dispute his findings, or his interpretation of them anyway.

It’s and interesting or fascinating read, which ever of my now horribly worn out adjectives you choose. (I need some new ones! HELP!) As always, the comments are very delicious too.

What’s on the Stove? Beef roast, mashed potatoes and gravy, roasted carrots and onions.

Sorry, I know this is a weak post. Sometimes nothing catches me.