Gratuitous Common Sense

I’ve haven’t been writing much recently, and when I have it’s been increasingly political. It’s an exercise in futility to try to inject common sense into politics, so it’s time to get back to basics.

What are some other common sense things that I could write about? Just to get the wheels spinning, let’s go with a random list of things you should know if you’re old enough to have pubic hair…

General Stuff

• The word “utilize” is just about entirely and universally unnecessary.
• Respect is earned… and easily lost when it’s only given because of your age.
• The promotion of Restless Legs Syndrome is a prime example of disease mongering. In matters of personal health, it’s best to consider the source and their vested interest in supplying the health information.
• There is an enormous difference between trust and faith, you would do well to learn it.

Fashion

• Axe body spray makes you smell like shit when you basically shower in it.
• Popped Collars have an inverse relationship with level of intelligence.
• Crocs are not meant to be worn in public. The only thing they go with is involuntary abstinence.

Academics

• Evolution is real… I know, because Noah didn’t have this thing on his boat.
• Numbers are not interchangeable with words in your sentences… “4″ is not an acceptable abbreviation of “for”.
• Just because there are two sides to every issue doesn’t mean that both sides are equal.

Driving

• The left lane is for passing ONLY. If you’re not passing someone, you don’t belong there.
• The on-ramp is for accelerating, not coasting.
• If you’re talking on your phone, you shouldn’t be driving. Period.
• If you’re texting and driving, then any attempt on your life is justifiable homicide.

Religion

• Santa Claus is real… all you need is faith.
• Xenu is real… all you need is faith.
• Jesus was not born in December… The Christians arbitrarily put it there to steal the celebration from the Pagans and profit off its popularity.
• See the quote adorning the top of the page.

Money

• $150 is too much to spend on shoes if you, or anyone older than you in your family, relies on an hourly wage for their primary source of income.
• Chances are, you have no idea about economic, monetary, or fiscal management even though it affects everything you do.
• Emergencies aside, your credit card debt is, most likely, all your fault.

Ahhh, now that feels good. All that common sense purged from my brain. It’s so… refreshing.

Of course, it’s not an exhaustive list, but it makes me feel better. And really, isn’t that what a blog is all about?

Share This

“This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.”

- Abraham Lincoln; Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861

Share This

Actually… no… no it doesn’t.

So nevermind.

Share This

“To laugh often and much;
To win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children;
To earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends;
To appreciate beauty, to find the best in others;
To leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch, or a redeemed social condition;
To know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived;
This is to have succeeded.”

– Ralph Waldo Emerson

Share This

Living Forever is the subject of the current poll, on the right side of this page.

In 1900, the life expectancy for newborn babies in the United States was 46 for males and 48 for females. By the year 2000, life expectancy had increased by an average of 64% to 74 for males and 80 for females. Even a modest increase at half that rate over the next century would put average natural life expectancy above 100 years of age. If our civilization continues at the current rate, it will be over 125 years by the year 2100.

With the exponential growth of scientific advancement over the last half century, we might even expect an increase in that rate. Some scientists are saying that the first person that will live to see 200 is alive today. Some are saying we’re on the brink of flat out reversing the aging process. Crazier ones are purporting that the scientific discoveries and possibilities offered by gene/DNA manipulation will allow us to live as long as we want.

But what kind of social consequences does that have, if we just won’t die? How long would you want to live? 200 years? 500 years? 1000 years?

If you think our current life expectancy is ‘just right’, then what do you think the people alive in 1900 thought? What age will the first generation of the 22nd century think is ‘just right’?

Share This

“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.”

- John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America

Share This

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despicable an ignorable war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.”

- Albert Einstein

Share This

In light of the second, and now somewhat infamous, republican debate in South Carolina, I thought I should revisit my earlier post on Ron Paul. In that post, I mentioned that I didn’t know a whole lot about Ron Paul and his philosophies on issues besides the ones quickly noted on the “About Ron” page on his presidential campaign website. And I wanted to revisit it since neoconservatives are trying desperately to paint him as a quintessential “conspiracy theorist” with regard to 9/11, including everyone’s favorite Patron Saint of Terrorism Aftermath™, Rudy Giuliani.

It seems that, in the debate, Ron Paul made the “controversial” implication that our actions have consequences. And because of that, he is catching a lot of flack from “true republicans” who cheer anyone that threatens a free society and demands that government have the power to do all they can to protect us, even if it is at the expense of that freedom.

Ron Paul made the implication in response to a question about terrorism and 9/11. Here’s the exchange:

REP. PAUL: … Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We’ve been in the Middle East — I think Reagan was right.

We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we’re building an embassy in Iraq that’s bigger than the Vatican. We’re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us.

MODERATOR: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

REP. PAUL: I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we’re over there because Osama bin Laden has said, “I am glad you’re over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.

Saint Rudy jumps on this as an opportunity to remind everyone where he was on 9/11:

Wendell, may I comment on that? That’s really an extraordinary statement. That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn’t really mean that. (Applause.)

Why is it that Saint Rudy suggests he answered the question with a resounding “Yes”, and gets away with it? I’m pretty sure Ron Paul could have said anything besides the word “No” after Wendell’s question, and it wouldn’t have mattered to Rudy.

Anyway, in the wake of the exchange, Ron Paul has given Saint Rudy a reading assignment to help educate him on what he means, instead of telling Rudy he didn’t mean what he said. The assignment includes Chalmers Johnson’s Blowback, Robert A. Pape’s Dying to Win, and Michael Scheuer’s Imperial Hubris, and the 9-11 Commission Report - the very report focused solely on the day Rudy was there to… well… be there (remember??? Remember, damnit!).

He even provided Cliff Notes to make the read a little easier and understandable for Giuliani, including among others:

“The suicidal assassins of September 11, 2001 did not ‘attack America,’ as political leaders and news media in the United States have tried to maintain; they attacked American foreign policy. Employing the strategy of the weak, they killed innocent bystanders, whose innocence is, of course, no different from that of the civilians killed by American bombs in Iraq, Serbia, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.”

– Chalmers Johnson, Blowback, page XV

(More Cliffs Notes in this article)

Since I admire anyone who suggests we take responsibility for our actions instead of creating an external locus of control for everything except the most desirable consequences, this prompted me to take a closer look at Ron Paul. And after some searching I came across what basically amounts to a blog. It’s called The Ron Paul Library.

So I spent some time reading through the library, and I must say that my original inclinations were correct. I certainly don’t agree with him on everything, but the underlying philosophy on the role of government and all that it implies is something this country has desperately needed for at least 7 years, if not longer.

I’ll give a couple of examples.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

- Siddhartha Gautama (The Buddha)

Share This

Welcome to Conversations with Jesus. In this fireside chat, we will be listening to a wonderful discussion between two of history’s most admired martyrs. Both tried, convicted, and sentenced to death, it is nothing short of remarkable that we are able to bring both of them here today for Conversations with Jesus. Without further adieu, I say ‘welcome’ to both of you…

Jesus meet Socrates… Socrates meet Jesus…

Socrates:
Good morning, Jesus, I have heard much of your marvelous teachings. In my own modest way I am a philosopher here in Athens. I am told you have great wisdom and certainly that is indicated by the throng of admirers that follow you through the streets. If you have a few moments to spare, I would appreciate it if you would enlighten me with the answers to some of the puzzling problems I have been wrestling with all my life

Jesus:
I am as a fisher of men in my search for followers. I bring the truth of God to all men. Seek and you shall find, ask and it shall be answered knock and it shall be open unto to thee.

Socrates:
There is one basic question that has always been uppermost in my mind. Although it has always been an insurmountable obstacle to me in my search for the truth and meaning, I am sure that with your learning you will find it far too easy and think me a foolish old man. I have always longed to live honorably and nobly, but it seems that I have merely stumbled through life without even knowing what was honorable or noble. With my limited understanding, it often seems to me that life, even with all its sound and fury, really signifies nothing. Please tell me: How should a man live; what is the purpose of life?

Jesus:
To serve and worship God.

Socrates:
Which God?

Jesus:
There is only one god.

Socrates:
Oh. You should live here in Athens. We have several to choose from.

Jesus:
There is only one true God.

Socrates:
Of course. And which one is the true God?

Jesus:
The true god is Lord God.

Socrates:
Yes. But who is Lord God? Or what is he?

Jesus:
He is the infinity of wisdom, love, compassion, peace, and mercy. He is the creator of heaven and earth all things in the universe.

Socrates:
Of all things?

Jesus:
Yes-all things. He is omnipotent. He is master and controller and maker of all things. He is omnipresent-nothing can happen that he does not know beforehand.

Socrates:
Did he create plagues, wars, death, suffering and evil?

Read the rest of this entry »

Share This