Found from link on WorldNetDaily:
Is Mona Lisa really a self-portrait by Leonardo Da Vinci?
I remember a big brouhaha over this in 1986, so it isn't exactly the new, groundbreaking theory that it is proclaimed to be.
That is all.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
More on Haiti
If you would like to give, but wish to give to an organization that is concerned with Haiti's spiritual as well as physical poverty (I think that Pat Robertson is more correct about Haiti's spiritual state than the secular majority wish to give him credit for), Advancing Native Missions is taking contributions:
Advancing Native Missions is combining with other Virginia agencies to rush practical aid to the Haitian people through native Haitian Christian ministries. Please help. We need your gifts by cash, check, or credit card for the costs.
Click here and then on the "GIVE RIGHT HERE" link to give.
We have an opportunity here I think to spread the gospel and to bring a lot of suffering people to Christ.* There is a short window, though, I think, so we should do all we can NOW.
That is all.
*Crass to think of this disaster as an opportunity? No, crass that we didn't care until now.
Advancing Native Missions is combining with other Virginia agencies to rush practical aid to the Haitian people through native Haitian Christian ministries. Please help. We need your gifts by cash, check, or credit card for the costs.
Click here and then on the "GIVE RIGHT HERE" link to give.
We have an opportunity here I think to spread the gospel and to bring a lot of suffering people to Christ.* There is a short window, though, I think, so we should do all we can NOW.
That is all.
*Crass to think of this disaster as an opportunity? No, crass that we didn't care until now.
Thoughts on Scott Brown's Pick-Up
Is it a racial code? Not exactly.
It is, however, a class code.
The point of the "pick-up truck" is for Scott Brown to identify himself with blue collar workers, despite not being a blue collar worker himself. Yes, he is primarily trying to be identified with working class whites, but his interest is more in being identified as their champion vis a vis snobbish white collar sorts (which is the implication that is desired whenever the term "liberal elite" is used). Put another way, he is saying "I may be white collar, but I have blue roots."
This is also the tack used with Sarah Palin, and at least in her case, I found it rather grating (and to the extent that Scott Brown played the same cards as Palin, found it grating for him as well). This is not because I have anything against blue collar workers, or think that they are not capable of being politicians. What I find grating is the constant emphasis on this identification rather than on the actual issues.
I will admit that I have not followed enough of Scott Brown's campaign to know how much he talked about actual issues. I am under the impression that he did so enough to be a reasonable candidate.
The problem with Palin, however, is that her identity and her life seemed to overwhelm any particular ideas she had, and those who swooned at her did so for identity politics reasons rather than due to any actual issues.
In this way, Palin was in many ways similar to Obama, and those who mock him as the "Obamessiah" should be careful (as many have not been) not to venerate Palin in exactly the same way.
That is all.
It is, however, a class code.
The point of the "pick-up truck" is for Scott Brown to identify himself with blue collar workers, despite not being a blue collar worker himself. Yes, he is primarily trying to be identified with working class whites, but his interest is more in being identified as their champion vis a vis snobbish white collar sorts (which is the implication that is desired whenever the term "liberal elite" is used). Put another way, he is saying "I may be white collar, but I have blue roots."
This is also the tack used with Sarah Palin, and at least in her case, I found it rather grating (and to the extent that Scott Brown played the same cards as Palin, found it grating for him as well). This is not because I have anything against blue collar workers, or think that they are not capable of being politicians. What I find grating is the constant emphasis on this identification rather than on the actual issues.
I will admit that I have not followed enough of Scott Brown's campaign to know how much he talked about actual issues. I am under the impression that he did so enough to be a reasonable candidate.
The problem with Palin, however, is that her identity and her life seemed to overwhelm any particular ideas she had, and those who swooned at her did so for identity politics reasons rather than due to any actual issues.
In this way, Palin was in many ways similar to Obama, and those who mock him as the "Obamessiah" should be careful (as many have not been) not to venerate Palin in exactly the same way.
That is all.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Na, NA, na-na, na-na, the Senator is, A CENTERFOLD!
So Scott Brown has won in Massachusetts.
If you Google "Scott Brown Cosmo" you will get the meaning of the title.
It will interesting to see if and how this alters the Senate.
Obviously, this is a message to the Democrats, and an indication that they need to be careful lest they get repeats of this in November.
On the other hand, I don't think that we can say with certainty what that lesson is, as much as everyone would like to say "the Democrats need to listen to my preferences!"
That is all.
If you Google "Scott Brown Cosmo" you will get the meaning of the title.
It will interesting to see if and how this alters the Senate.
Obviously, this is a message to the Democrats, and an indication that they need to be careful lest they get repeats of this in November.
On the other hand, I don't think that we can say with certainty what that lesson is, as much as everyone would like to say "the Democrats need to listen to my preferences!"
That is all.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Martha Coakley: Bitch Who Should Never Be Elected to Anything
Dorothy Rabinowitz has the details of Ms. Coakley's involvement in the Amirault miscarriage of justice.
Thanx and a tip o' the hat to Lawrence Auster.
That is all.
Thanx and a tip o' the hat to Lawrence Auster.
That is all.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
I Have a New Job
Good news, I have a new job, so I won't be unemployed past the end of the month.
That is all.
That is all.
Friday, January 08, 2010
Cool Quote
From Lew Rockwell as noted on Wikipedia:
I never liked Martin Luther King, Jr. I thought he was a fraud and a tool. But when he turned his attention to the evils of the U.S. war on Vietnam, I began to like him. That's also when the establishment turned against him, and soon he was murdered.
That is all.
I never liked Martin Luther King, Jr. I thought he was a fraud and a tool. But when he turned his attention to the evils of the U.S. war on Vietnam, I began to like him. That's also when the establishment turned against him, and soon he was murdered.
That is all.
Monday, January 04, 2010
They Don't Get It
Ampersand argues that refusing "marriage equality" dilutes marriage by causing places to adopt "marriage lite" for homosexuals, which arrangement is then by necessity extended to heterosexuals, diluting marriage.
Supposedly, this is ironic, because marriage would be less so diluted if traditionalists gave in and let marriage extend to same-sex couples without a fight.
The problem, as I said more than four years ago, is that extending marriage to same-sex couples by nature turns it marriage itself into "marriage-lite."
The problem ultimately comes down to that the people who want to redefine marriage really don't understand that expanding the definition of marriage changes what marriage is. They view marriage as some unspecific contract, so there is no reason to restrict it to opposite-sex couples. That it is not an unspecific contract, and that extending it to same-sex cou[ples makes it moreso this, and that this changes the definition of marriage for everyone, cannot enter their brains.
As Lawrence Auster would say, they have no sense of transcendence. (At the very least, they have an underdeveloped one).
That is all.
Supposedly, this is ironic, because marriage would be less so diluted if traditionalists gave in and let marriage extend to same-sex couples without a fight.
The problem, as I said more than four years ago, is that extending marriage to same-sex couples by nature turns it marriage itself into "marriage-lite."
The problem ultimately comes down to that the people who want to redefine marriage really don't understand that expanding the definition of marriage changes what marriage is. They view marriage as some unspecific contract, so there is no reason to restrict it to opposite-sex couples. That it is not an unspecific contract, and that extending it to same-sex cou[ples makes it moreso this, and that this changes the definition of marriage for everyone, cannot enter their brains.
As Lawrence Auster would say, they have no sense of transcendence. (At the very least, they have an underdeveloped one).
That is all.
Saturday, January 02, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)