Existential debate

I have existential debates with myself about random stuff all the time. We caught a History Channel program about the Marianas Trench last weekend and I read an article by Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg. Steinberg wrote about how one way to check whether one is a a zealot or rational person is to try and argue the strongest case for an opposing viewpoint. If one can't argue convincingly for the other side, one may be an extremist.

So, avoiding the finer points of tectonic plates, subduction and the Pacific Rim of Fire, one scientist on the History Channel program held up a rock from the bottom and said something like, "This material is 173 million years old, it's one of the oldest rocks on the planet." Now, I'm watching and going, if someone is a Creationist, they don't believe that rock is more than something like 6,000 years old.

In order to not believe scientists or rational people on the matter of evolution, people must basically refute a whole lot of theories. Basically, everything from gravity to the second law of thermodynamics to evolution is a theory...it is the mainstream belief until a better theory comes along, whenever that is (if you got a better theory for gravity, I wanna invest in your company).

So, evolutionary theory is validated by carbon dating, which is rooted in the theory that atoms have a nucleus with various energy levels full of electrons and the different number of electrons, their degradation and release of energy is what radioactivity is all about. At that point, I began thinking that if a Creationist doesn't believe in evolution, then they also cannot believe in the nuclear bomb, because both are essentially rooted in the same theory of radioisotopes. How can a Creationist argue for their agenda in a school powered by a nuclear power plant? Something's gotta give.

This ended my internal debate trying to argue for Creationism. While I am not an atheist, I am apparently a scientific zealot.

I am a big fan of the Bible, Christian and other religious teachings.

I am not a big fan of religious dogma of any sort, be it Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, partly because I believe that religions are man-made institutions. I do fully reserve the right to believe in a God.

Blame game

An Investor's Business Daily editorial from Monday, September 15 lays the blame for the financial and housing sector meltdown at the Clinton Administration's doorstep. However, they stop short of laying out exactly how the market was motivated to offer high-risk products.

But it was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that
dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the
market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the
balance sheets of many of Wall Street's most revered institutions.

Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they
had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound
business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or
face stiff government penalties.

Unfortunately, the site has no comments at the bottom, so the normal user-content Q&A activity is absent.

Questions:

1) What rules made banks have no choice?
2) If they knew it was a bad decision, why did they still do it?
3) Since businesses operate on self-preservation, wouldn't it be up to the business to identify a losing prospect and not enter into that line of business, knowing how risky it could be?

To me, with no details or research, the IBD is saying that the Clinton Administration created a noose, and the market put their collective necks in it. Mixing metaphors, if we're to understand profit motive, there must have been some huge carrot on the other side of the noose.

The IBD is saying that it's the government's fault for even allowing the option in the first place, which cannot be reconciled with smart business decisions.

**UPDATE**

I didn't address the "stiff government penalties".

1) Did the banks and lenders do an assessment to decide whether high-risk loans carried a higher risk for loss than the goverment fines?

2) Did they think about not offering the products, and taking the hit from the goverment, while they were wallowing in the derivative benefits from the high-risk products?

3) Which was the harsher result: being fined by the government, or not being in existence 10 years later?

Be my friend...and die!

Jewish people that are not right-wing realize that when a right-wing Christian acts all friendly to their people it's not because he's being friendly in a Christian way, but it's because he wants them to die in the Rapture.

Or so a Jewish friend once told me.

Astounding

How has this not gotten more coverage?

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization is:

an intergovernmental mutual-security organization which was founded on June 15, 2001 by the leaders of the China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

The Time Magazine article says that Iran may be added to the mix and that some in the U.S. government consider the coalition to be

a retooled Warsaw Pact that could serve to balance NATO.

News? Anyone? Yeah, thought so.

Bad Except When They're Good

Victor Davis Hanson posting at The Corner on National Review Online makes an interesting remark while commenting on Iran and its nuclear implications.

He writes about the "moral equivalence" of Prof. John Mearsheimer at the YearlyKos convention, who surmised that Iran had the right

"to have a bomb since Israel has one too-as if an anti-American theocracy run according to Sharia Law is no more a nuclear threat than a pro-American liberal democracy."

So anti-American theocracy is the bad and pro-American liberal democracy is good. Catch that? Liberal is good, says the conservative.

Okay, just checking.

Biden Bye Bye

Going off my impression of Joe Biden yesterday at the AFL-CIO debate and his work on the bankruptcy bill, I have no respect for him. He is a blow-hard whose support for a morally bankrupt piece of legislation hurt more Americans than have been killed in Iraq.

On top of this, he was seemingly unable to show any type of mourning, sympathy or empathy for a woman whose husband was killed in the Sago mining accident in West Virginia a while ago.

I hope he doesn't have your vote.

Gingrich loses mind, speaks sense

Newt Gingrich has an epiphany:

"We have got to get beyond this political bologna. I'm not allowed to say anything positive about Hillary Clinton because then I'm not a loyal Republican, and she's not allowed to say anything positive about me because then she's not a loyal Democrat. What a stupid way to run a country."

Pit bull culture

CNN.com examines the relationship between rural, white dogfighting and urban, hip-hop.

A woman from the United Kennel Club notes:

"It's important to understand that this isn't about race, but it is about culture."

Russell Simmons says, regarding the presence of pit bulls in hip-hop and rap culture:

"That's why we have poets, have always had poets and artists in society, to say things that sometimes people don't say otherwise."

In this case, I think it's a bit of the "poets" reflecting society and society trying to emulate said "poets"...at the same time.

CONCACAF Gold Cup

The CONCACAF Gold Cup runs through the 24th of June, with the final and semifinals in Chicago.

If USA beats Panama, then most likely Canada, and Mexico beats Costa Rica and then most likely Honduras, it'll set up a USA-Mexico showdown at Soldier Field.

Cross your fingers.

**UPDATE**

USA vs. Canada is Thursday at 6pm CST, and Mexico vs. Guadeloupe (?!?) is at 9.

Dog fighting

Michael Vick is stupid.

A Sports Illustrated Special Report calls some attention to the Vick-dogfighting scandal and the "grisly pastime".

My take. if it's against the law it's bad, right...the law's the law, good or bad (someone said), we can't grant exceptions to the law, just because someone doesn't like it. *end sarcasm*

Independent of that, I think it's a pretty sick "sport" or "hobby" or whatever anyone calls it.

Regardless of what dogs were bred to do, doesn't mean it's okay now, I think (please note the reference to the "rape stand").

I think there's something missing in people who enjoy this. Like a soul.

Vick is/was my favorite NFL athlete to watch on the field.

If he gets suspended, maybe it puts some fear into the rest of the "hypercompetitive" overcompensating athletes to find another "hobby" or "sport" (maybe they could read to middle-schoolers once a week...oh wait, they can't read their own multi-million-dollar contracts).

Protecting borders

An Examiner editorial cites a study "by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse affiliated with Syracuse University":

"...of more than 800,000 immigration court cases between 2004 and 2006, however, found only 12 involving illegal aliens that the government charged with terrorism. A mere 114 illegals were brought up on “national security” charges during the same period, according to TRAC. Only 31 of these people were actually deported."

I think these statistics do the opposite of bolstering the editorial's pithy "31 down and how many millions to go."

There's not millions of terrorists in the country. Almost every single illegal immigrant is here to work, not terrorize. Just because white Americans think they're being terrorized by the help (that they need) doesn't mean that's actually happening.

Catching flak

Hotline's On Call has carried the story of a war of words between Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain. After McCain criticized Sens. Hillary Clinton and Obama about their vote for the Iraq war funding supplemental, Obama responded:

“And if there ever was a reflection of that it's the fact that Senator McCain required a flack jacket, ten armored Humvees, two Apache attack helicopters, and 100 soldiers with rifles by his side to stroll through a market in Baghdad just a few weeks ago."

McCain jumped on the apparent misspelling in subsequent the press release, noting that:

"By the way, Senator Obama, it's a 'flak' jacket, not a 'flack' jacket."

FWIW, spell check in Microsoft Word for the sentences, "I am wearing a flack jacket" and "I am wearing a flak jacket" both escape without need for correction.

Interestingly, the word "flak" is an acronym from German. If Obama deems the criticism worth responding to in the future, I hope it's just as smarmy.

True believers

The Rev. Al Sharpton has gotten himself into some hot water for saying:

"And as for the one Mormon running for office, those that really believe in God will defeat him anyway. So don't worry about that. That's a temporary, that's a temporary situation."

His statement came during a debate with Christopher Hitchens, the author of the recent book, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.

NewsBusters notes that:

"...Sharpton and [Paula] Zahn discussed the fact that until 1965 [according to CNN], or 1978, according to Sharpton, the Mormon church did not accord blacks full status. That engendered the following exchange:

SHARPTON: ...prior to '65, '78, whenever it was, they did not see blacks as equal, I do not believe that as real worshippers of God, because I do not believe that God distinguishes between people."

Considering that the founders of this country and several generations of its people afterwards put into place and accepted laws that "did not see blacks as equal" this is a curious statement. Sharpton is supposed to be clergy, hence the "Reverend" (licensed and ordained a minister at age 9, says Wikipedia).

Sharpton was ordained by someone who was ordained by someone who was ordained by someone who was ordained by someone who was white. And that person's religion (Christianity) had members who did not view blacks as equal.

I am so thrown, I cannot elucidate my point.

Fit & Smoke

BusinessWeek lists Phillip Morris USA as No. 29 on its "Best Places to Launch a Career" list. The accompanying graphic shows a stylized shot of a Marlboro advertisment, presumably outside a gas station.

I wonder if enterprising new-hires of Phillip Morris would even smoke. For that matter, I wonder if middle-management with mortgages and families smoke. My guess is no. At least, not the ones inclined to be healthy. I make the assumption that Phillip Morris USA has health-inclined employees and even caters to them because, ironically, BusinessWeek notes that the nation's largest tobacco company:

"...offers on-site fitness facilities at some locations--and even concierge services."

Are the employees on the stair-stepper with Marlboro in hand? Right. That's what I thought.

What we really are

From Wikipedia:

Amerigo Vespucci used a Latinised form of his name, Americus Vespucius, in his Latin writings, which Waldseemüller used as a base for the new name, taking the feminine form America.

Amerigo itself is an Italian form of the medieval Latin Emericus, which through the German form Heinrich (in English, Henry) derived from the Germanic name Haimrich.

So...we are the United States of Henry.

R&D

I wonder how much research and development dollars collectively are being spent on the new Viagra or Propecia or other boutique drug compared to the money being spent on researching alternative fuels. In other words:

"Great, you get an erection at the snap of a finger for exactly one hour! However, a terrorist just blew up your apartment building with money you spent in Saudi Arabia for that unleaded that filled your SUV take your date to the restaurant."

Quote of the Day

InstaPundit called it the "Comment of the Day" found on Huffington Post:

"September 11 will forever live in our consciousness, but let us not forget those that perished at the hands of Americans."

Virginia Tech

BattleCry on Nightline

"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

Eerie observation

Will Femia of MSNBC's Clicked makes an observation:

For so many people, the computer is still that beige thing in the distant extra room/home office with the knot of wires in the back and the laundry draped over the chair.

'Twas funny reading that with my laundry draped over the back of my chair.