The Seattle Post-Intelligencer [cough] has an editorial by a guest columnist from the UK.  And she has found out or secret plot, I'm afraid.  She rightly starts out with:

In the long, hot autumn of 2000, the world was shocked by the contempt for democracy shown by the Republican Party. They knew their man had lost the popular vote to Al Gore by half a million votes. They knew the majority of voters in Florida itself had pulled a lever for Gore. But they fought -- amid the confetti of hanging chads -- to stop the state's votes being counted, and to ensure that the Supreme Court imposed George W. Bush on the nation.

Yes, the world is easily shocked.  I'm sure even Castro was felled by such dastardly election fraud.  I guess asking for a recount and not protesting when the Supreme Court threw out Gore's lawsuit counts as contempt for democracy.

But we have another trick just waiting for 2008.  It's... wait for it... the Electoral College! (bum bum bum!)

Don't laugh - to Democrats, following the Constitution is a dirty trick.

It is the worst part of the Constitution, producing perverse results again and again. On four occasions there has been such a big gap between the national popular vote and the state-by-state Electoral College votes that the guy with fewer real supporters in the country got to be president. It happened in 1824, 1876, 1888 and -- most tragically for the world -- in 2000.

Wow.  Four times.  That's really something.  Look, I don't really care about the Electoral College.  It seems to work but if we wanted to switch to the popular vote instead that's fine too.  A little more prone to fraud and abuse, I think, rather than the smoothing effect of the EC, but whatever.  But let's have no nonsense about how it's somehow only favoring one party or the other.

Just to show I did READ the article, she's complaining about a referendum in California that would split their EC votes much like Maine does.  The idea being that this will give the GOP some of California's EC votes rather than the 0 it usually gets.  And that doing that without also splitting Florida and Texas would be unfair.

But I think our UK friend might not understand the obstinate sovereignty that our states like to exercise.  The idea that the Texas legislature would be in the least influenced by what California does is absurd.  And it is, ultimately, a state decision, not a federal one.  And if you don't like it, you know, change it.  But there's no point complaining about the rules when you lose if you knew them going in.

Found on Photobucket:

Ok, I never thought I would see the day where Whoopi Goldberg would be the voice of reason either.  But that day has come.

You may have read about the British teacher jailed in the Sudan.  If not, she was teaching there and had some teddy bears that the kids could name.  Well, one of them wanted to give the bear a name that many people share in that region.  Unfortunately, the name was Muhammad and while it's ok to name a person that, not so much a stuffed bear.  So this tolerant theocracy does what everyone would expect and throws her in jail over an innocent mistake.  Then there were protests, predictions of long sentences and lashes and protests calling for her execution.  She's safe now, by the way.

Yeah, so no surprises there.  Then everyone's favorite bastion of sensible thought, The View, decides to discuss the story.  Barbara Walters has the usual liberal response to terrorism, i.e. "Yes, it's a terrible, terrible thing.  But..."  Her point is that while it's terrible what's happened, the same attitude is present in this country.  And that there are places here where if you named a stuffed bear Jesus that people would be outraged.  She doesn't say people would be calling for executions (at least as far as I could stomach getting through the clip) but she does draw a moral equivalence there which is just absurd.  And, seriously, if Whoopi is saying she doesn't believe it then I think you're way off the deep end...



IMAO's Harvey has really the best response I've seen to the mess right here.

Ok, not sure what's going on with the Greek letters, but it's a nice video made for Tears of the Saints by Leeland.

What happens when you take the guitar solo from Pink Floyd's Comfortably Numb and loop it with a 15 second offset?  Actually, something rather nice.

Here's a great article on what it means to be a Christian living in America.  It echoes a lot of the same feelings I've had.  Due to my work with the church youth and trying to stay involved in politics, I am told all the time that we need to get fired up and take back this country.  Or that it used to be a Christian nation and now it's slipping and we need to stop it before it's too late.  But I could never really buy into that.  I thought it was just apathy but in reality it's a sense of hopelessness.  After all, as much as I care about this country, it is not my home.  And there is a coming darkness that will require the complicity of the U.S. simply because we are too powerful for it to succeed otherwise.  So the country is doomed eventually in any event.

Not that we shouldn't, of course, try to delay it as much as possible.  But ultimately we will not win and the country will perish because it is of this world.  So we should pray, and mourn, and, eventually, we should let go.

John Piper puts it better than I do (quoted in entirety and emphasis added):

The fact that Christians are exiles on the earth (1 Peter 2:11), does not mean that they don’t care what becomes of culture. But it does mean that they exert their influence as very happy, brokenhearted outsiders. We are exiles. “Our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Philippians 3:20). “Here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come” (Hebrews 13:14).

But we are very happy sojourners, because we have been commanded by our bloody Champion to rejoice in exile miseries. “Blessed are you when others . . . persecute you . . . on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven” (Matthew 5:11-12). We are happy because the apostle Paul showed us that “the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Romans 8:18). We are happy because there are merciful foretastes everywhere in this fallen world, and God is glad for us to enjoy them (1 Timothy 4:3; 6:17). And we are happy because we know that the exiles will one day inherit the earth (Matthew 5:5). Christ died for sinners so that “all things” might one day belong to his people (Romans 8:32).

But our joy is a brokenhearted joy, because Christ is worthy of so much better obedience than we Christians render. Our joy is a brokenhearted joy because so many people around the world have not heard the good news that “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (1 Timothy 1:15). And our joy is a brokenhearted joy because human culture –- in every society –- dishonors Christ, glories in its shame, and is bent on self-destruction.

This includes America. American culture does not belong to Christians, neither in reality nor in Biblical theology. It never has. The present tailspin toward Sodom is not a fall from Christian ownership. “The whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5:19). It has since the fall, and it will till Christ comes in open triumph. God’s rightful ownership will be manifest in due time. The Lordship of Christ over all creation is being manifest in stages, first the age of groaning, then the age of glory. “We ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies” (Romans 8:23). The exiles are groaning with the whole creation. We are waiting.

But Christian exiles are not passive. We do not smirk at the misery or the merrymaking of immoral culture. We weep. Or we should. This is my main point: being exiles does not mean being cynical. It does not mean being indifferent or uninvolved. The salt of the earth does not mock rotting meat. Where it can, it saves and seasons. And where it can’t, it weeps. And the light of the world does not withdraw, saying “good riddance” to godless darkness. It labors to illuminate. But not dominate.

Being Christian exiles in American culture does not end our influence; it takes the swagger out of it. We don’t get cranky that our country has been taken away. We don’t whine about the triumphs of evil. We are not hardened with anger. We understand. This is not new. This was the way it was in the beginning –- Antioch, Corinth, Athens, Rome. The Empire was not just degenerate, it was deadly. For three explosive centuries Christians paid for their Christ-exalting joy with blood. Many still do. More will.

It never occurred to those early exiles that they should rant about the ubiquity of secular humanism. The Imperial words were still ringing in their ears: “You will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved” (Mark 13:13). This was a time for indomitable joy and unwavering ministries of mercy.

Yes, it was a time for influence–-as it is now. But not with huffing and puffing as if to reclaim our lost laws. Rather with tears and persuasion and perseverance, knowing that the folly of racism, and the exploitation of the poor, and the de-Godding of education, and the horror of abortion, and the collapse of heterosexual marriage, are the tragic death-tremors of joy, not the victory of the left or the right.

The greatness of Christian exiles is not success but service. Whether we win or lose, we witness to the way of truth and beauty and joy. We don’t own culture, and we don’t rule it. We serve it with brokenhearted joy and longsuffering mercy, for the good of man and the glory of Jesus Christ.

By John Piper. © Desiring God. Website: desiringGod.org

So what came out of the ridiculous Republican debate last week?  Well, besides the startling (to those not paying attention) revelation that CNN again planted the debates with Democrat activists (up to 1/3 identified so far including a member of Hillary's GLBT steering committee) it seems that our friend Huckmentum is on the rise.  Says Patrick Ruffini:

[#1 winner, Huckabee] won this and it wasn't close. In past debates he'd try to be all folksy in his national security answers, which really deflated his gravitas. But the issue terrain was a target rich environment for him, from his strong rebuttal to Mitt on not punishing children for the sins of their parents, to his eloquent and authoritative answer to the ill-conceived Bible question to the quip about Jesus not running for public office. Though clearly on his game, Huckabee seemed to benefit from everyone else being off theirs.

On the one hand I'm glad he's doing so well and stands a chance at winning Iowa.  That could catapult him to winning the nomination.  Trouble is, I'm not sure he's electable in the general.  So, we'll see.

 

John Stossel urges us not to learn the wrong lessons from Thanksgiving:

When the Pilgrims first settled the Plymouth Colony, they organized their farm economy along communal lines. The goal was to share everything equally, work and produce.

They nearly all starved.

Why? When people can get the same return with a small amount of effort as with a large amount, most people will make little effort. Plymouth settlers faked illness rather than working the common property. Some even stole, despite their Puritan convictions. Total production was too meager to support the population, and famine resulted. Some ate rats, dogs, horses and cats. This went on for two years.

[Later], the people of Plymouth moved from socialism to private farming. The results were dramatic.

"This had very good success," Bradford wrote, "for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. ... By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many. ... "

Because of the change, the first Thanksgiving could be held in November 1623.

What Plymouth suffered under communalism was what economists today call the tragedy of the commons. But the problem has been known since ancient Greece. As Aristotle noted, "That which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it."

When action is divorced from consequences, no one is happy with the ultimate outcome. If individuals can take from a common pot regardless of how much they put in it, each person has an incentive to be a free rider, to do as little as possible and take as much as possible because what one fails to take will be taken by someone else. Soon, the pot is empty and will not be refilled -- a bad situation even for the earlier takers.

Reminds me of the old Onion article: Marxists' Apartment A Microcosm Of Why Marxism Doesn't Work

You might think that the Writer's Strike is all Rush Limbaugh's fault.  But here are a couple writers from the Daily Show making a very compelling case as to why they deserve compensation when their content is used online.  And I have to say, I think they're right.  It's clearly a double standard.

Much has been made recently about the debate between Clinton and Obama about who has more foreign policy and governing experience: a former first-lady on her second Senate term, or a first-term Senator who once lived overseas.  Of course, the closest either has to executive experience is sharing a house with a former President.  As always, Scrappleface puts it in perspective and shows the true depth of their experience:

"In the White House, First Lady Clinton worked side-by-side with Vice President Al Gore, who I defeated in 2000," said Mr. Bush, "In the Senate, she served alongside John Kerry and John Edwards, who I defeated in 2004. No one else in the race has such broad-ranging experience with what it means to be a Democrat presidential candidate in the 21st century."

The president noted that "the very fact that Sen. Clinton is now debating with rookie Sen. Barack Obama over who has more experience serving in an executive position, which neither senator has ever done, further demonstrates that among Democrats she's seasoned, prime beef. As my friends in the ranching business say, 'It's what's for dinner'."

From Amazon's Al Dente blog:

Serendipity 3 (menu) in, of course, Manhattan, has set the Guinness World Record for most expensive dessert at $25,000.  Most of the cost is in the dish, though.  The dessert is called the "Frrrozen Haute Chocolate" and includes "a slushy mix of cocoas from 14 countries, 5 grams of 24-carat gold, whipped cream, and shavings from a luxury truffle" and is served in a dish with 1 carat of diamonds and a golden spoon.

Trouble is they were shut down earlier this month for health code violations after finding "a live mouse, mouse droppings, flies, and dozens of live cockroaches".

That last video reminded me of this one that I meant to post a while back.

Sorry I haven't felt much like posting recently.  After much hand wringing and worry it turns out I have costochondritis.  Yes, all the symptoms of a heart attack, but none of the actual danger.  Feeling better now, though, and I have a big stack of stuff saved up.  I've been using a new add-on, MyStickies, that lets me flag webpages with a comment and tags.  It's good for organizing and remembering why I wanted to comment on something in the first place.  It's also been great for remembering Christmas ideas.

Whooooooooooooo!  That is all.

Someone has built their home theater system in the style of the TNG Enterprise and the result is just the coolest thing that has ever existed.  It includes the theater, a bar area, and a sitting area.  Technically-speaking, the theater also boasts automatic doors with sound (for that authentic touch), a red alert button, and over 3800 DVDs stored on hard drives spanning 8 servers.

But, this is nothing without pictures:

Still working on my review of the debate last week.  Since then, though, all six of the "undecided voters" that CNN chose to ask questions have been identified and, to no one's surprise, they are all involved with the Democratic Party or are political activists.  Not that there's anything wrong with that -- it is a Democratic primary debate, of course.  But the fact is that they were not represented as "undecided Democratic activists" or even "undecided Democrats".  CNN wanted us to believe that these people were ordinary, random citizens just yanked from UNLV and the surrounding area.  Don't believe me?  Can't bear to give up the CNN Kool-Aid.  Fine:

First they accuse him of being a cross dresser and then they have Mo Rocca make fun of how he talks.  A brief excerpt:

MO ROCCA: When we select a president, we're not just electing an executive to do a job. We're electing a person to represent us, which is why in these marathon campaigns, we start to look at personality traits. It can be Hillary Clinton's laugh, George Bush's smirk back in 2000. Or now for me, it's Rudy Giuliani lisp. I'm a little biased here because I have a lisp, too, which is why I went to a speech therapist to sound it out.

Is America ready for a president with a lisp? Rudy Giuliani has a lisp. Full disclosure. I have a lisp. Disclosure.

MO ROCCA: If a lisp also connotes weakness, is that something that can be a detriment to someone who's trying to become the leader of the free world?

Says the WSJ:

It is unimaginable that a mainstream network would give this sort of treatment to, say, Barney Frank or John Edwards. We're not going to feign outrage again; the truth is that we find this all sort of amusing. But it is a reminder of just what a sham left-wing political correctness is. People who claim to oppose "homophobia" or other forms of prejudice often turn out merely to want a monopoly on it.

Indeed.

Says the doctor: "I'm not very good at seeing the sex."  So we know nothing yet.  Next appointment is 12/5 so hopefully we'll know then.  Still, most importantly, babies and mother are just fine.

Mike Huckabee has a new ad out capitalizing on the Chuck Norris Facts internet meme that was popular a while back (but isn't really anymore).  So I'm not sure if it's kind of out-of-touch or brilliant.  But I'm leaning towards the latter.

Today's the day, hopefully.  We hae an appointment in a few hours for an ultrasound and the twins are old enough now that the doctor should be able to tell the sex.  That is, if they'll cooperate.  So there may be some news posted here later today.

A prayer here and there that the ultrasound go well and that the twins are nice and healthy would, as always, be much appreciated.

Don't feel like getting up at 4 AM and standing in line for a $5 toaster?  Amazon is having a Black Friday sale that you don't even have to leave the house to take advantage of.

From ScrappleFace, concerning Hillary's "asbestos pantsuit" that she brought to the debate last night:

China Recalls Hillary Clinton's Asbestos Pantsuit

(2007-11-16) — Chinese authorities today announced a sweeping recall of garments manufactured with asbestos, including the pantsuit worn by Sen. Hillary Clinton during last night’s Democrat presidential debate.

Sen. Clinton’s trousers were marketed mostly through retailers in the Washington D.C. region, and made from "a political-grade fabric that provides protection from spontaneous combustion, thus avoiding the embarrassment of 'pants on fire'."

Because asbestos is the leading cause of lung cancer in laboratory mice and rats, experts said it posed a particular danger to Sen. Clinton's rivals on the stage last night.

The Chinese government apologized to the former First Lady for shipping the flame-retardant slacks, and said she could either return them for a refund, or try asbestos abatement through dry cleaning.

A spokesman for the Clinton campaign said the candidate had no worries, "because Hillary has a lot of friends in Chinatown who are experts at laundering things, and would love to contribute to her campaign in any way they can."

Heh, "pants on fire", that's great.