This is to make Republicans look like irrational followers of a cultic mastermind a la Jim Jones/David Koresh. While I do think there is a tendency, especially on the part of Christian fundamentalists, to overtrust the President because of his faith, that trust is not to the Kool-Aid-sipping degree that Drum's commenters seem to think Republicans operate on.
Furthermore, it doesn't fit with my observation of Republicans in general. The conservative talk-radio hosts have been sharply critical of the President, especially on the Medicare prescription drug program and campaign finance reform. Of course, you don't see a lot of criticism right now because we have an election coming up in the next couple of days.
Hitchen's offers as proof of his theory this quote from Slate:
I know the Bush-Cheney campaign occasionally requires the people who attend its events to sign loyalty oaths, but this was the first time I have ever seen an audience actually stand and utter one. Maybe they've replaced the written oath with a verbal one.
Pruitt's implication, of course, is that if you vote for Kerry, then you don't care about freedom, liberty, your family, or your country, which is total nonsense. It's just the stupid partisan politics that I expect from both sides of the aisle until November 2nd.
But as far as loyalty oaths go... sure, why not? If you believe that the Bush/Cheney ticket is the better choice, why be afraid to say so?
Do you care?
I don't.
"But they disappeared under Bush's watch!"
Debateable and obviously a partisan attack. Even Kevin Drum says that it doesn't matter in the big scheme of things.
"But it's 38 truckloads of powerful explosives!"
And? Like terrorists don't have ways of getting/making explosives? What's 380 tons, compared with the 600,000+ tons Saddam had before we invaded? Or compared with whatever stockpiles the House of Saud and the leadership of Iran, Syria, and North Korea have?
"They represent a combat liability to our troops in Iraq."
See above.
What really bothers me about this story is the way the media has jumped on this, and really every other negative story about the Iraq war. I don't pay much attention to the Iraq news, mainly because I believe that the people on the ground are A) trained in the ways of warfare and B) better informed than I am and therefore C) better qualified to assess the combat situation and formulate strategy than I am. I have nothing meaningful to contribute to that discussion, and I believe that our boys are the best in the world.
Now, let's consider what the media is reporting on Iraq: There are battles being fought. Roadside bombs and car bombs go off on nearly a daily basis. Occasionally someone's kidnapped under the threat of beheading.
So there's a war going on. I don't need to read my paper every morning to tell me that people who hate us are shooting at us in Iraq.
I get tired of hearing the stories that imply that our troop commanders in Iraq are so incompetent that they can't keep an eye on every gram of explosives that may or may not have been in Iraq. I'm sick of the expectation that no American will die in the war.
Is there a reason that we can't stop second-guessing our troops? Delegate the fighting to them and remember that no plan survives contact with the enemy.
Where are the flying cars? I was promised flying cars.
Of course, there are a few obvious objections, such as: With all the car wrecks we have now with only 2 dimensions, what's going to happen when we add a 3rd? What happens when an Osama wanna-be flies one of these into the capitol building or Mt. Rushmore or something?
On the other hand, since AVCEN is marketing these things as taxis instead of private air craft, and since they cost "under a million dollars," we probably wouldn't see a whole lot of these at first. And since the company is based in an ultra-cautious nanny-state, the UK, there will probably be some sort of extensive licensing procedure to pilot these mini-aircraft.
But still: The future will get here. Eventually.
(Via Samizdata.net)
Come into my tu-uh-my, Oh-so-very yu-uh-my...
(Via Lileks. Although I'm pretty sure it's Korean, not Japanese.)
No, I've got a paper due for Practices/Protocols of International Business.
Which I just started working on today.
And which is due tomorrow.
I've got to quit doing this to myself.
Anyways, see you tomorrow!
This music is hard to describe, especially since I don't know the vocabulary of music. I'd describe it as all melody. It's just... well, Ashby called it "improvisations," which is probably the best word for it. The music just meanders, but it sounds good. It's nice especially when I need background noise to study to, because it isn't distracting. Absolutely beautiful stuff.
That's Charlie Brooker, c/o The Guardian, 3-7 Ray Street, London EC1R 3DR, United Kingdom, Tel: 020-7278 2332. Or you could email at politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk.
(Via Baldilocks)
Working from the book of Genesis, and risking some speculation on the Hebrew calendar, he calculated that it began at 6pm on Saturday October 22, 4004 BC.
Apparently Ussher skipped I Timothy 1:4 which says, "Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do."
Some might say that this verse doesn't apply to this situation; I ask you then what situation it does apply to?
Also, according to Strong's concordance, the word "questions" is the Greek word zetesis, which means "a subject of questioning or debate, a matter of controversy." So to "minister questions" means to stir up controversy, which is exactly what has happened as a result of giving heed to the geneologies all the way back to Creation.
Anyways, lest we think that Britain's geologists are accusing young-earth creationists of lying, we get this quote:
I think that situations like this show that preachers need to stick to "godly edifying which is in faith." Regardless of the scientific accuracy of the Bible, which is not only up for debate but one of the primary causes of flamewars on message boards everywhere, it does teach a pretty good system of ethics and morality. (Surely everyone can agree on that, can we not?)
(Via Ramblings' Journal)
It's been a pretty decent week though, all things considered. I aced my stats test on Wednesday and I did well on a salesmanship test. I had one other test in international business which I barely had any time to study for, and the teacher decided to make this one open notes for some reason. I heard the best chapel message of the year on Tuesday. I found out my new chapel seat is outside of the Academy (read: high school) section (thank goodness!). I had to videotape a sales presentation for my salesmanship class yesterday, and it went.... well, as well as could be expected. I'll be honest, I'll probably never take a career in sales. Salesmanship is a valuable skill to have, but a career in selling is definitely not my first choice of what I want to do with my life. I'm shy, and don't particularly enjoy meeting new people. But, as I said, the video project went as well as could be expected, and I enjoy talking to my partner in the project. (According to a personality survey activity the class did, he was an "Expressive," while I was the only "Analytical" in the class.) Pretty good.
Next week looks pretty decent too, although I've got a lot of work to do this weekend. There's a high-school Fine Arts Festival coming, which means that there are going to be visitors in the dorms (Yet another reason to be a town student!), so the Bible faculty decided not to assign any Bible Doctrines assignments this week. There is a test over all the verses we've had this semester so far (EEEEEEEEK!), but after that, nothing. And my Ops Management class is meeting in the snack shop on Tuesday. It's all good.
But I am so tired.
Sleep comes....
That makes me sad. That is all.
I love the expression of the girl on the left.
I'm almost hoping Kerry wins just for the entertainment value. These are fun!
(Via Baldilocks)
"If we do not know who the mother is, who the father is, without knowing all the brothers and sisters, incest becomes inevitable," Keyes told the Marquette Park rally held to oppose same-sex marriages.
"Whether they mean it or not, that is what will happen. If you are masked from your knowing your biological parents, you are in danger of encountering brothers and sisters you have no knowledge of."
I think that he's saying that because the child is adopted and doesn't know who his biological parents are, he might have sisters that he doesn't know about and might fall in love with one of them.
Never mind of course that this could happen to any child who's adopted and doesn't know the identity of his birth parents.
Keyes is starting to rival George W. Bush in his propensity to keep his foot in his mouth.
(Via Dean's World)
So, that's the question: Do you choose to be homosexual, or are you born that way?
My answer's in the extended entry.
It all depends on what the meaning of homosexual is. If the definition of a homosexual is one who commits homosexual acts, then yes, that's a choice. If the definition of a homosexual is one who is attracted to people of the same gender, then no, it's not.
You can't choose whom you're attracted to, but can choose how you'll react to that attraction. As a comparison, I find a number of young women at BJU attractive, but I don't touch them. A married man might find his office's secretary to be desirable, but that doesn't mean he's going to engage in an affair with her. In the same way, a homosexually-inclined man should restrain himself if he intends to follow the Biblical definitions of morality.
Being a business student, I encounter this word far too often. I must take care never to use it.
Speaking of business language, seriously, what's the deal with excessive, complicated words? I can understand them, but... why use them? For example, here is a passage from my Operations Management text:
Is that much verbiage necessary? You used too many words. First off, in bold above is the term they're defining, which is three or four words too long. I'd call the device in question a product checker, or ::teeth grit at overused word:: quality checker, or just checker for short. Name the device after what it does. Then you can just say "These systems automatically check products to ensure that they meet our specifications."
Frankly, text books are full of this... garbage. I'm reasonably certain that the writers and editors are being paid by the word rather than for well-written, clear works. (See also: Calvin and Hobbes)
Another example of needless complication was brought up by a commenter on Samizdata: Never say "interface with" when you really mean "talk to." That's just a dumb buzzwordphrase.
Just say what you mean.
Don't get me wrong, it's cool for what it does. For example, a desktop search on my computer for Investment turns up this:
(The colorful splotch above covers up my IP address)
Basically, it can be useful for finding some information. What I was really looking for was something that a replacement for the stupid WindowsXP search dog sidebar. I want an old-fashioned dialog box where I can type win*.txt and the computer will know what to look for.
At the very, very least, Google-friends, I need the ability to sort alphabetically.
But, anyways, neat service.
Let me tell you, I love the Google company. You have a company that gives away every consumer product it has and limits its advertising to text ads only--no flashing banners, no popups. I've never gotten any spyware from Google. Basically: Google isn't evil. God bless 'em.
But if they ever do turn evil, hoo boy... Western civilization will fall. Or we'll go back to Yahoo. One and the same.
The Artist Series was actually pretty good. They had a tenor by the name of Paul Groves come and sing some songs. A little Liszt, a little Rachmaninov, some Gabriel Fauré (composer of that #1 jam from the 19th century, Le papillon et la fleur), and some weird post-modernist Englishman by the name of Benjamin Britten. Oh, and a couple of arias and a Broadway song thrown in for good measure. But his encore was by far the best song of the evening, because it was in English and because it was not post-modern. Thanks to Google and Amazon, I found out that it's from the operetta The New Moon, and the song is entitled "Softly, As in a Morning Sunrise." The song ends:
Are the passions that kill, love, and let you fall to hell
So ends the story;
Softly as in a evening sunset
The light that gave you glory
Will take it all away!
Groves himself: According to the Collegian, our state-run university newspaper, he went to Juilliard and has sung at major opera houses throughout the world (Carnegie Hall, the Metropolitan Opera, and someplace in Italy called La Scala). So he can sing pretty well.
I enjoyed it. I would have preferred to be revising my Bible Doctrines paper with him in the background, but still, he was very good.
(If you want to hear what this guy sounds like, go here and listen to the track entitled Act 2: Unis Des La Plus Tendre Enfance - Paul Groves.)
It's nice to see that we're rationally and fairly comparing the two parties. I'm glad the debate hasn't degraded into personal attacks, broad generalizations, and unfavorable comparisons to the mentally disabled.
(Via Michelle Malkin)
My name is Jeremy. You can't have my last name, sorry. In fact, you can't even be sure that Jeremy is my real first name. Because this is the internet, that's why. I might be a 48-year-old guy named George from Massachusetts smoking marijuana listening to hip-hop, and you'd never know. I might even be Larry King. How could you tell?
But, you can call me Jeremy. I'm currently a Junior at Bob Jones University. (Betchya would have never guessed that if I hadn't told you!) Just to dispel a myth about BJU right now: It's not a racist institution. There's no ban on interracial dating. We did have such a ban at one point, but it's been gone for years. (In fact, the ban would probably have been lifted sooner had some idiot not tried to sue the university over it and (successfully) revoked our tax-exempt status. BJU doesn't like to be pressured into decisions, especially by legal coercion. The institution moves slowly and cautiously, but, generally, in the right direction.) Dr. Bob has never once preached against interracial dating in chapel in my time there. BJU treats people the same, regardless of race. That's probably why they're called racist; they don't pander to minorities.
ANYway, back to me! I'm majoring in Comprehensive Business Management, and minoring in Public Relations Writing. I don't know what I'm doing with my life yet. I really like my Operations Management Class (Hi Mr. Wilch!), so I might look into that direction. I think It'd be really cool to set up my own business that sells board/card games, following the Comfy Chair Revolution line of thinking.
Religiously, I'm still deciding. I've gotten to the point where I'm starting to question what I've always been taught. I try to keep an open mind, realizing that even though people I love and respect believe something, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're right. Their viewpoints are important, and I'm always willing to listen, but in the end the decision of what I believe is up to me.
Politically, I'm from minarchist branch of libertarianism. That means I believe government has legitimate functions, but not many of them. The point of government is to protect the citizens from those who would do them harm, within and without. So, the government should consist of national defense and criminal justice. Not entitlement programs, environmental studies, or education. Oh, and they can print money too. They did a decent job setting up an interstate highway system, but I think the private sector can handle roadbuilding more efficiently from here.
One political issue I differ from BJU on is gay marriage. They seem to think that American society will collapse if the Federal Marriage Amendment isn't passed; I think that marriage is a religious issue that the government ought not to be involved in anyways.
In fact, this issue is like a number of others. I believe that the government ought not to intervene unless someone is threatened by physical danger or loss--so, government ought to protect us from murder, theft, rape, etc. On the other hand, the government ought not to try to protect me from myself or tell me how to live, as that's the function of my own personal ethics and/or religious beliefs. For example, it's no one's business but mine what chemicals I put into my body, so long as I don't steal my grandmother's social security check to pay for the drugs or kill somebody by driving under the influence of drugs. In other words, so long as I'm not hurting anyone else, I should be allowed to do whatever I want to do without fear of governmental involvement.
(In case you were wondering, that's the difference between libertarians and conservatives.)
Oh, and I was and am for the war in Iraq. See also, Bill Whittle.
Enough about politics already!
In addition to the traditional religious music that BJU promotes, I like Irish music. I also like bluegrass/"Appalachian" music. I don't like heavy metal or rap music, because I don't like music that makes me angry. I do like jazz piano, because it's pretty; you can follow it, but you don't know where it's going.
I think that Pirates of the Caribbean is about the best movie ever. Also, anything made by Pixar. (I love Toy Story 2.)
Relationships: I have two younger brothers, a mommy, a daddy, and a doggy. I couldn't ask for a better family. Seriously.
Oh, you meant with a girl. I'm still looking.
And, on that note, I'm going to end this post. I'm going to put this up on the sidebar so that anyone who cares can find out all about ME!!!!. I hope you enjoy reading my blog! (Leave comments!)
UPDATE: Because of comment spamming idiots, I've had to close comments on all of my Movable Type entries. If you want to add comments about this particular page, go here instead. Thanks!
Tell me, isn't God supposed to be all-powerful? But apparently Pat thinks that God isn't powerful enough to overcome Yasser Arafat's title deed to Jerusalem.
Only God should decide if Israel should relinquish control of the lands it captured in the 1967 war, including the Gaza Strip, West Bank and East Jerusalem, Robertson said, in a reference to Sharon's plan to pull out of Gaza next year.
"God says, 'I'm going to judge those who carve up the West Bank and Gaza Strip,'" Robertson said. "'It's my land and keep your hands off it.'"
Robertson here crosses the line from stupidity--ignoring one of the most basic doctrines of Christianity, the religion Robertson supposedly follows--to false prophecy. And, as a commenter on Cut on the Bias says, "you know what the Bible recommends as consequences for false prophets."
To the customer, quality means that the product does what he expects it to do or more.
That's all. Meeting and exceeding expectations. Doing what you say you'll do. It's not that hard.
slammed it back while reading news
now it's gone, i'm sad
You can expect homeschooling to be eliminated if Kerry wins. You can expect the Bible to be declared a hate book if Kerry wins. You can expect the mandatory application of Ritalin to any child with spunk if Kerry wins. You can expect the complete and total elimination of border with Mexico if Kerry wins.
You can expect a rampant increase in partial-birth abortion and the sale of baby body parts if Kerry wins. You can expect an increase, not a decrease, in violence and pornography coming out of Hollywood if Kerry wins.
You can expect a completely socialized medical and dental world if Kerry wins. You can expect totally out-of-control lawyers -- the total loss of control of lawyers if Kerry wins. You can expect talk radio to come to an end because of a so-called Fairness Act that will be passed if Kerry wins.
You might see the end of the Electoral College to ensure that never again will the Democrats be threatened. You might see a movement to seize all guns if Kerry wins. And ultimately you might see the Constitution itself rewritten if Kerry wins.
IDIOT.
There's a verse that mentions people like him: "by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of."
To the guy who was searching for "sebring 'service engine soon,'" service your engine soon.
To the guy who was searching for "Wheels Exquisite homework," do your own homework already!
To the guy who was seaching for "screensaver of the canadian idols of 2004" ... Um. OK. Is that the northern equlvalent of American Idol? Why on earth would you imitate that? Do you admit the superiority of American culture?
To the guy who was seaching for "Blogjones": Congrats, you found me.
To the guy who was seaching for "drug test minute man synthetic urine": I don't have any for sale, sorry. Why don't you try not doing drugs before your drug test?
One last thing: My OneStat meter tells me that someone from BJU looked at my website yesterday. I wonder who it was. Hmm.....
(Source: Yahoo News)
He hasn't exactly had a good track record with football, has he?
You know, a part of winning a presidency is maintaining a good image, which is why Kerry is going to have trouble come November if these PR snafus keep coming.
On the other hand, if Kerry wins, just think about having four years of fun material to work with!
The following is a quotation from page 4, my emphasis:
"Although modern man is much more sophisticated in the religion he invents, he continues to do the same sort of thing the Phoenicians did. Consider the mythology of evolution. Because a person does not feel comfortable accepting what the Bible says about the creation of earth in six literal days, he accepts the theory that all life happened by chance. He imagines that certain inorganic elements randomly combined into the amino acids that form the basic organic chemical building blocks of all living things. Then, he reasons, through the dual mechanisms of genetic mutation and natural selection, all the incredibly complex and varied plants, animals, birds, and fish we see around us evolved over several hundred million years. A few scientists have dared to criticize Darwinism--even to the point of calling it a hopelessly naive remnant of the nineteenth century (see Michael J. Behe, Darwin's Black Box). But, although some criticize evolution, they seem incapable of positively asserting that the Bible is God's inerrant record of how the world began. Evolution is popular because it allows man to view himself as an independent agent, free from responsibility to the Creator. Man has put himself in the place of God and worships his own mind as the final test of all truth. Humanistic rationalism is more sophisticated than Baalism, but it is just as idolatrous."
I disagree with the assumption that anyone who doesn't believe the Bible has invented their own belief system so that they could live any way they pleased. He's wrong to assign a self-serving hedonistic motive to religious beliefs other than Christianity. People believe other religions because they were convinced that those religions were right, not (necessarily) because they seek worldly pleasure or independence from God.
I believe Jaeggli also operates under the assumption that all modern people have the truth to begin with and reject it for their own self-delusions, rather than simply being raised under a different worldview/religion. If I'm raised as a Muslim, then of course my religious beliefs are going to be different from the Bible. Does that mean that I invented Islam so that I could live as a hedonist? No, I believe in Islam because that's what I've always been taught and assume to be true. So with evolution: If I'm raised by an atheistic evolutionist, then chances are good that I'm going to be an evolutionist by default, not because I worship my own mind or something.
Indeed, so it is also with Christianity; Christians tend to assume Christianity to be true because that's either A) what they've always believed or B) what they've been convinced of. If it's your goal to convince others of Christianity, it'd probably be best to not make accusations of self-deception because they don't already follow your belief system.
However, since the book’s topic is not idolatry or non-Christian beliefs, I still hold out hope for the quality of the book. The stated purpose of the book is to study the attributes of God as they are revealed in the Bible, rather than following a “systematic theology” as Ryrie does in the other textbook. In other words, this will be a study about God, rather than about the six-syllable words that describe man’s beliefs in God. (Seriously, Ryrie’s discussion on the doctrine of the trinity and all the petty little squabbles over the exact nature of the doctrine makes my head hurt. Apparently factionalism has been a part of Christianity since the late 300’s A.D.. So you’ve got these two guys, Arius and Athanasius, who are arguing over whether Jesus and the Holy Spirit are made of the same substance as God the Father, or a similar substance. This argument escalates until the church has to call a special council to settle the issue. It’s as bad as the KJV-only nonsense going around today.)
Anyways: Fingers are crossed. Here we go.
UPDATE: I've been told that the introduction above came off as kind of sarcastic. It's not supposed to be. Sorry if I gave that impression.
This strikes me as being a good thing for young-earth creationists/biblical literalists.
(Via Dean's World)
Last night, I was watching a video during the debates. I stopped it at some point... 9:30-ish, I guess, because my brother had come in to ask my dad to fix his little electronic MegaMan toy. The candidates were talking about Iraq. Restart the tape. After we finish, we stop the tape, and the debate is wrapping up. Still talking about Iraq.
And they were arguing about the same stinkin' things they've been arguing about for the whole campaign! I can't imagine how anyone who pays attention to politics would find this the least bit interesting.
And so, in the absence of anything new that the candidates would say, the press focuses on style. Bush's facial expressions, Kerry's Orange-Glo spray-on tan, whatever. Grrrrr.
Someone asked my Statistics teacher, Dr. Guthrie, what he thought of the debate. He said he played with his grandchildren, and had chosen that better part.
Anyways, my RSS reader's skip feature is going to get a lot of exercise today.
