From WJLA Television:

Chuck Brown, the legendary musician who is known as the "Godfather of Go-Go," passed away Wednesday, his daughter confirmed to ABC7's Sam Ford.

- More -

Chuck Brown in Performance

DC Celebrates the Life and Art of Chuck Brown

• Holding anyone accountable for the cruelties of teenage years is unfair. However, the past can offer a chance for public redemption as acknowledgement, genuine regret, and growth are expressed. Youth, after all, is at least partly for learning how to live with a decent respect for others. At Rumproast, Vixen Strangely is less than impressed by Governor Romney's youthful pranksterism.

• Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame notes a Mitt-didn't-do-it-and-so-did-Barack reaction from conservatives. While Mitt Romney does not recall the incident and chuckles over what he calls a prank, Obama clearly recalls an incident from the fifth grade, and as an adult expresses shame and regret.

• Andrew Sullivan gave an eloquent and emotional reaction to President Obama's endorsement of marriage equality. "There is something about hearing your president affirm your humanity that you don't know what effect it has until you hear it." Gwendolyn Barry with New Global Myth comes close to matching it.

• Infidel 753 speculates about the real reason President Obama came out for marriage equality and comes up with an interpretation considerably more charitable than some.

• Max's Dad briefly reviews a constitutional amendment to the state Constitution of the state of North Carolina. No, Not THAT amendment. He has a pithy summary.

• Relatively new resident at Mad Mike's America, Gregory Gonzalez ponders well documented Obama Derangement Syndrome, looks for the reason, and believes the reason for the hatred is hidden in plain sight.

• Ned Williams is back (Yaayyy) at Wisdom Is Vindicated where he notes a Washington Post article crediting President Obama with specific steps to increase support for CIA intelligence gathering capability. Ned is skeptical and wants to know the sourcing. Sounds like a fair expression of curiosity.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, gives us evidence of the logical extremes reached when those who have the power of incredible destruction (that would be us) deny the humanity of others (that would be those of a different religion).

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster quotes Chad Peace recounting the concerns that have led him to advocacy on behalf of independent voters. I think she reveals the same motivation.

• Slant Right's John Houk is distraught that former Swiss citizen Michele Bachmann has suffered in redistricting. He joins her appeal for help. My own reaction to Representative Bachmann includes her recent brief expatriation.

• Chuck Thinks Right takes delight in the fact that she is only ¹⁄₃₂ Cherokee. Not noticed by Chuck is that Bill John Baker, the elected chief of the Cherokee Nation, also happens to be ¹⁄₃₂ Cherokee. I'm sure Chuck will get a laugh out of that. Tee hee.

• James Wigderson notes the primary nomination of the Democratic opponent Governor Scott Walker in Wisconsin's recall election, with the hope that the defeat of Walker's opponent will end possible recalls of other anti-Union officials. Walker, as you may remember, has consistently claimed that he has had no intention of busting unions except for his honest attempts to balance Wisconsin's budget. A pre-crisis video has surfaced of Governor Walker describing his divide and conquer plans to ... destroy unions in Wisconsin. No reaction from Jame yet, but his site has been experiencing connection difficulties. Maybe later.

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST regards the ousting of French President Nicolas Sarkozy in recent elections as a repudiation of austerity measures that don't seem to be working. Efforts to starve the patient back to health have temporarily killed recovery in Europe in an almost perfect inverse ratio of severity of those measures to economic well being. He points out that Republicans urge the US to go the same path.

• Ryan at Secular Ethics defines as fallacy the Appeal to Nature argument. His take down is brief. Restating it is pretty much enough. I sometimes call the fallacy let ill enough alone. Other times, I think of it as libertarianism, but that's mostly when I'm in a bad mood, and I get tempted by snark.

• Vincent of A wayfarer's notes stops at a traffic light and weaves a blackbird, Bach, Helen of Troy, and a very old novel into a musing about infatuation. Then the light changes and he drives off.

• Why do we have to do this, Sir? begins with a humorously bad day, involving grading papers, bad tempers, and joyful farting and ends with a major cause of educational collapse.

• Good discussion of Economics, Statistics, and Truth in Comments section more interesting than the initial topic. Ryan, Tim McGaha, and John Myste are three of the most entertaining intellects around. Take a look.

• Black holes are where reality as we think about it ends. Kind of like the GOP. Okay that was a cheap shot. In Mad Mike's America, Chris Buescher acknowledges the complexity of explaining the point where common sense ends, kind of like the Republican Party. Okay, that was a low blow. He then goes on to use standard English to make it all almost comprehensible. At least as comprehensible as anyplace could be where light can't get out and time goes backward. Kinf of like ... you know.

• Three famous pundits argue about whether opposition to gay marriage is a key indicator of anti-gay bigotry. One of the three, Tommy Christopher of Mediaite, takes the obvious position: duh, of course!! And Tommy is right. Along the way, he mentions related topics: President Obama's evolving position, and the Romney campaign's more creationist reaction to right wing sputtering. They fired a gay guy.

• Infidel 753 reviews that gay firing and draws some conclusions about Romney leadership and the Republican party itself.

• Vixen Strangely at Rumproast reacts to the firing as a test of Romney character.

• Chuck Thinks Right chronicles a silly and sad episode involving an anti-bullying activist who attacks the Bible and those Christian students who walked out as he spoke. Dan Savage has since apologized, probably because of Chuck's disapproval.

• The Heathen Republican writes about the death of bin Laden. His point is that he sees no point to all the talk about bin laden. Nothing to see here folks. Let's move on. A tired-of-people-talking-about-what-I'm-talking-about piece can be amusing.

• Yesterday I posted my own reaction to the bin Laden exchanges, an examination of the out-of-context quoting of Mitt Romney by the Obama campaign. I suggested that the context actually made Governor Romney look worse, and reflected an important policy difference. I sent an advance copy to several writers whom I respect. Slant Right's John Houk graciously re-posts my argument with his own partial rebuttal. He does include a bit of a slam at us liberal types for our lack of respect for the troops defending our right to verbally attack them. I just hope our family's young Marine in Afghanistan doesn't discover I have been doing such a thing. My thanks to John Houk for his generous posting of my effort and his rebuttal. That was nice, John.

• Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk is ticked off at Walmart's exploitation of global economics.

• Ryan at Secular Ethics examines the philosophy of utilitarianism from several perspectives. Greatest good for the greatest number multiplied out quantitatively. Thought-provoking, as usual. Ryan's virtual classes are kind of like real classrooms, except Ryan's are more fun. Which may make them a better fit within a utilitarian philosophy.

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster promotes a talk by Lenora Fulani on over-taxed, underserved poor and working class people who are excluded from the American political process. Nancy's focus is on those who choose not to join a political party. We might also consider newer restrictions designed to prevent non-drivers (bus riders, the elderly, students) from voting at all.

• Manifesto Joe of Texas Blues discovers a one-time television character that seems to preview the adult Mitt Romney back when Mitt was but a lad.

• James Wigderson covers a visit to Wisconsin by Cardinal Timothy Dolan. Lots of video. He mentions apparent media bias and also the "fight with President Barack Obama about mandatory abortion coverage by insurance providers." No mention of contraception, which is what the fight is actually about. Interesting illustration of media-based spin.

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger, at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST, uses brief quotes from wise figures through the ages as a response to conservative talking points.

From Serious Eats:

A few days ago, Robyn Lee had posted about the burger reincarnation of a pizza that Pizza Hut in the Middle East has created in their murky pizza laboratories. In her words:

In the Middle East, Pizza Hut's new Cheeseburger Crown Crust Pizza goes beyond the typical cheeseburger pizza construction—topped with chopped-up cheeseburger ingredients—and nestles mini burger patties into a modified "crown" crust. The rest of the pizza is topped with burgery ingredients of lettuce, tomatoes, onions, special sauce, cheese, and beef nubs.

Today, having grabbed lunch at a Pizza Hut branch in Dubai, I'll tell you what the cheeseburger pizza construction actually tastes like.

- More -

• A couple of months ago, Ryan at Secular Ethics began a wonderful discussion on the tension between truth and belief, that is to say belief as a part of evolutionary determinism. That's my interpretation, not his. The theme is how to move beyond our desires and beliefs to a more objective view. The discussion rages still. Entertaining, wide-ranging, informative. Ryan knows how to put these things together, as evidenced by his generous contribution yesterday on our site.

• Our favorite John Myste at John Myste Responds does his part in the debate/discussion Ryan hosts breaking off into a separate piece on critical thinking, using, in part, controversies about gay equality to illustrate the pursuit of intellectual honesty. All in all, pretty heady stuff. Still, I will be at worship service tomorrow.

• Slant Right's John Houk proclaims his Christianity and targets those Jesus wants him to despise. Tiresome. Houk quotes Deuteronomy. When he gets back to Leviticus and discovers shellfish are an abomination, we can speculate on whether he will rage against Red Lobster restaurants. I'll feel better after worship tomorrow.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, enjoys the discovery of a famed theoretical physicist that philosophical thought that embraces empiricism is indeed worthwhile.

• In Mad Mike's America, Erin Nanasi reports that Pat Robertson wants Christian kids to stop bullying gays. Erin is getting an ulcer over having to agree with Pat Robertson. So it really is okay to worship tomorrow?

• Why do we have to do this, Sir? reviews his sermon for tomorrow, on Sanctuary Sunday and the providing of sanctuary to those in need. Like maybe we should stop looking in a spiritual mirror, look outside the sanctuary windows, and maybe go out to help? That seems one more good reason to go to worship tomorrow. Besides, you know, praising God.

• Kent Pittman, writing from Open Salon would like the Boy Scouts of America to end a focus on homophobic propaganda. Sexual thoughts, gay or straight, should be left out of scouting.

• Manifesto Joe of Texas Blues considers a campaign in which Mitt Romney's long, journey into night with a puppy tied to his car roof, and the Republican response that Barack Obama, as a little kid, obediently ate the dog meat that was put in front of him. Apparently Politics is going to the ... you can take it from there.

• At Rumproast, marindenver considers the latest conservative alarm at President Obama's weakness in the face of countries that no longer exist and evil forces that have been gone for over two decades. The edges of right fringes? Nope. These are the folks candidate Romney embraces as his guides to foreign policy. Rip Van Winkles do come to life, I suppose. Every 20 years, like cicadas do every dozen, they awake and give their wisdom to Republican candidates. They give good advice about days long gone.

• Infidel 753 discovers a pithy definition of Libertarianism. He goes a little beyond "Leave ill enough alone."

• The Heathen Republican applies his keen analytical mind to the November election and jobs. If you are unemployed you should vote for people who will get tough on you. Has to do with incentives, I suppose. It seems you will have a job if Republicans get to end your benefits. Some keen analysis there, Heathen. Kind of like you'll keep your balance for sure because the safety net has been removed. I dunno. Maybe he was really, really busy when he got to his keyboard that day.

• Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame has news of a new ad from a Super-PAC of Villainaires who attack President Obama for being so cool and popular. Really.

• Max's Dad is back (Yayy!!!) with a swiftian modest proposal for Mitt Romney's Vice Presidential running mate.

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster has a mess-o-news on the world of political independents, including money in politics, Illinois laws that keep you from running as an Independent for a while if you voted in a party primary, and more.

• When Scott Walker took office as Governor of Wisconsin, nobody suspected that he planned to make collective bargaining by many public employee unions unlawful. He had not mentioned it during his campaign. James Wigderson reports that Recall candidate for Governor, Democrat Tom Barrett, is warning that Governor Scott Walker will do it again, and turn Wisconsin into a Right to Work state. James says it's all a lie, and points to the Governor's assurances that he has no plan to do that. After all, if he planned to destroy unions, he would say so in advance, right? Right?

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger, at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST, provides a list of links he promises will be a good start as rebuttal to conservative talking points, courtesy of TomCat at Politics Plus.

• Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk kind of likes solar panels on roof tops. Governments, state federal, and often local, offer incentives. They tend to improve home value, and they look really neat. He gets impatient with occasional home owners' associations that put obstacles in the way. Pointless strutting of small time authority.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot goes back more than a century and a half, digs up the worst President ever, and somehow develops warm fuzzies for James Buchanan. Okay, maybe just mild sympathy. It's part of his remarkable, readable, series on the Civil War.

• Chuck Thinks Right disagrees with enforcement of a school dress code that has the incidental effect of keeping kids from wearing support-the-troops tee shirts. I'll ask our young Marine's mother to send a note to him in Afghanistan to find out if he especially cares about the school controversy.

• At Why do we have to do this, Sir? it's the faculty's turn to go insane as rumors flow of classroom reorganization within the building. Our erstwhile spiritual representative in Britain keeps on keeping on, waxing Shakespearean.

• How ever does he make these random wanderings so entertaining? How does he bring them together at the last moment into a coherence that reminds one of a high wire circus performer saving himself at the last breathtaking moment? Vincent of A wayfarer's notes ponders what to reveal and what to keep private in biography and blogging, veers into adventures at an unusual worship service held by the Jubilee Church.

• Michael Hawkins of Mad Mike's America takes on believers like ... well ... me, explaining gradations of agnosticism and atheism, but follows this with a cogent defense of atheism as a default position. The burden of proof is on believers. My own thoughts to a similar proposition can be found here.

• I remember hearing of a preacher ranting against the popular image of "a namby pamby Jesus," suggesting that a carpenter's son must have been physically powerful and should be portrayed as such. PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, takes a similar approach to a cute-as-a-kitten ad for atheism, and suggests a heartier approach. Yikes.

• Ryan at Secular Ethics evaluates each of the seven deadly sins from the perspective of an atheist. Pithy, instructive, entertainingly written, as usual. Ryan is worth a click and, for the discerning, a bookmark.

• Infidel 753 traces human morality to biology. The Ten Commandments are a path to reproductive success.

• Slant Right's John Houk is unimpressed with anti-Israel rhetoric that presents the frequently embattled country as an apartheid nation. Actually, if settlement policies don't change soon, the country will face either a future of becoming an apartheid nation, or of losing its Jewish identity. It's a matter of mathematics.

• Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame, brings up a racial double entendre used by the Romney campaign, allows that it may have been unintentional, and is called a racist by Fox News personalities because he noticed it. The logic is, if you catch onto a racial reference, you must be racist for thinking it refers to race.

• As Fox targets Tommy, Ta-Nehisi Coates of the Atlantic Monthly captures the phenomenon earlier this week:

  The conservative movement doesn't understand anti-racism as a value, only as a rhetorical pose. This is how you end up tarring the oldest integrationist group in the country (the NAACP) as racist. The slur has no real moral content to them. It's all a game of who can embarrass who. If you don't think racism is an actual force in the country, then you can only understand it's invocation as a tactic.

• YAFB of Rumproast unpacks Romney's slogan by tracing its literal roots, policy message and the actual results in the country of origin. Tough message, meaner policy, harshest result. Severe conservatism can hit pretty hard.

• Mike Tyson launches an irresponsible rant wishing deadly violence on accused Trayvon murderer George Zimmerman. Chuck Thinks Right sees it as a summary "all of the geniuses on the left" and, on that basis, decides his opinion of the killing itself. Why look at evidence or consider logic if you take Mike Tyson as an opposing guide?

• Several years ago, in a chat room, I had an internet confrontation with a participant who was a little too violent in his rhetoric about George W. Bush. I asked him if we should be concerned about a potential threat to the President. He got the legal implication and quickly shifted his direction. I confess I was angry. It was not the first time. Manifesto Joe of Texas Blues is more gentlemanly as he takes Ted Nugent to task.

• Dave Dubya contrasts popular reaction to Hilary Rosen's loose cannon rhetoric about Ann Romney with Ted Nugent's violent rants about the President. Threat? Threat? Who said I was actually gonna DO anything?

• The Heathen Republican excoriates President Obama for arguing against, but not abolishing, increases in income gaps between wealthy and middle class. Actually, he quotes Obama's April 14 address arguing for tax fairness rather than income redistribution, but why quibble over mere facts? He does accurately remember an argument he himself made a while back, offering stats on filibusters to "prove" Republicans don't filibuster inordinately. A look under the hood pretty much destroys Heathen's filibuster arguments, but he repeats them anyway. Like a house of cards, discredited filibuster arguments are used to shore up income inequality arguments that are misapplied to a different tax fairness address . . . until, like London Bridge, the dominoes all fall DOWN.

• James Wigderson believes the Wisconsin recall of Governor Scott Walker is hurting Democratic chances in the coming US Senate race. He casts it as Democratic effort that miscalculates the political effect. His analysis of the actual policy-driven anger by more than partisan participants appears in other articles.

• Jack Jodell has an angry piece at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST about finance driven hospital diagnoses that have seriously endangered his brother. Our prayers will continue.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot presents a solid series of facts about the future of space exploration. No it isn't ended. He includes fascinating video.

• The astonishing rock multi-instrumentalist and actor Levon Helm, drummer for The Band, died this week at 71. Nancy Hanks at The Hankster honors in joyful remembrance.

• Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk has a girl friend (good for him) who has AT&T and had a routine request. Turns out to be an unexpected madcap adventure. Papamoka is unimpressed with AT&T.

• The Heathen Republican holds forth on judicial activism, defining the term as going against the plain language of the Constitution in ruling for or against constitutionality "purely through interpretation of the Constitution." Since pretty much any reading of anything, even of "plain language," involves interpretation, his definition tends toward the cloudy. Partway through, after Heathen posits that judicial actions do not automatically connote judicial activism, you can get a sense of his drift with this: "If so, no one can rationally argue that overturning a law is automatically judicial activism, as President Obama has argued." It is hard to believe that even a partisan would reinterpret in that way the plain language of anything President Obama has said. Kind of like blogging activism. What the President actually did was to explicitly remind conservatives of their own long held definition of "judicial activism." We know Heathen can do better than this, because he so frequently does. At least that's been my interpretation.

• Dave Dubya is funny and focused as he writes on judicial activism. Dave's post is less analysis and more rant than Heathen's, but Dave is more true to the subject.

• Chuck Thinks Right finds an article published by AP that is devoted to a thin, low benefit, low cost, alternative within Obamacare. The theme of the article, backed by quotes, is that the Supreme Court oral arguments did not seem to reflect the existence of this part of the program. Chuck is upset. Thinks it should have been published as an opinion, not as news. Many journalists agree with Chuck's ethic, that balance between viewpoints is the goal of news, and that facts and documentation should go to the opinion pages if those facts fail to support both sides equally.

• Ryan (for real) at Secular Ethics manages to educate and entertain us with an explanation of circular reasoning. It reminds me of my own favorite example.

• Infidel 753 notes the loss of the Rick Santorum candidacy. It comes with apt cartoons.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot tries to determine what we've learned from the Romney victory and the strengths of two candidates going into the general.

• Betty Cracker at Rumproast poses an obvious question about Ms. Rosen's recent critique of Ann Romney. I suspect the real point should be that it is rarely good form to attack a candidate's spouse. A better commentary, one completely open to Hilary Rosen, might have been Mr. Romney's definition of their domestic relationship. He has his wife report to him regularly on women's issues. It would have been fair for Hilary Rosen to speculate on whether Governor Romney requires his wife to salute.

• Caroline Taylor at Mad Mike's America asks whether the entire War and counter war on Women is real or just a series of rhetorical jabs in the game of politics.

• A conservative officeholder unwittingly answers Ms. Taylor. Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk has video of an annoyed Republican legislator who offers to speak to a woman reporter using simpler words. It's not really a war on women. More of a cold war. On. Women.

• Conservative Ned Williams at WisdomIsVindicated has a reasonable question on a peculiarity with abortion law in Britain.

• Jerry Critter at Critter's Crap posts a chart without commentary that pretty much tells the entire story of budget deficits in America.

• Jack Jodell at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST has a few pertinent facts about tax fairness and corporations. Everyone should pay their fair share. And corporations are people too, my friend.

• Slant Right's John Houk reminds us of a conspiracy to have the UN remove humans from the earth. The plan is called Agenda 21. This sort of thing went viral in 1992, before the internet became ubiquitous. President George H. W. Bush and 177 other leaders started an initiative to help local governments promote economic growth. John brought this up last year as a plot to take over the world's farms, and the year before as a conspiracy to control international commerce. Next year, John will discover it again as an evil plan to commit something just awful. He tries to believe something new and amazing every day, but sometimes he runs out. When his crazed aunt forgets to tell him what she has read in the Globe, he has to recycle.

• Manifesto Joe of Texas Blues is back. (Yaaayyyy!!) He vivisects Allen West's poor attempt at faded McCarthyism. "I believe there are about 78 or 81 members of the Democrat Party that are members of the Communist Party."

• James Wigderson recounts the story of a conservative whose writing appeared on a racist website. Attacks by liberals followed. Problem is the article was not itself racist, the writer did not know the racist website would be carrying the article since it had been written for another site, and the author attempted to get it removed. Lessons for leftists like ... well ...me: Let's be careful. Let's apologize when we get it wrong. Life is hard enough. OH! One more thing. Good work, James.

• An old falsehood of the extreme right contrives a connection between President Obama, Eric Holder, and the New Black Panthers. Tommy Christopher of Mediaite takes notice when Sean Hannity claims to have a photo of a face to face meeting, which he keeps promising to show to his audience. Tommy finds the photo explodes the story and explains why Hannity isn't showing anything. Anything. But, hey! They're all black, so how can there not be a connection? Good work, Tommy.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, notes the now defunct stalking app, Girls Around Me, and discovers a strange and offensive defense.

• At Why do we have to do this, Sir? our still developing spiritual leader considers Easter just past, the Easter eternal, truth, history, parables, and Truth.

• I don't know how he does it. Vincent of A wayfarer's notes has a couple of dreams which he weaves into a brief exploration of psychiatry and religion. Entertaining and thoughtful.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, encounters Christian bloggers who write about the chance meeting. Myers responds with a critique: they pat themselves on the back for politeness. He points out that politeness is a low bar. That may be a little unfair. The self-applause is implicit at most, and politeness is a beginning of mutual respect.

• Infidel 753 attends a workshop on evolution and the genome and determines that science and Christianity are incompatible. It will break my heart tomorrow to tell our pastor the bad news. And on Easter, yet. With respect (always), I believe Infidel makes a classic, and understandable, error. Christianity is often seen as monolithic, defined as through the lens of the 1925 Scopes Trial in Tennessee.

• Why do we have to do this, Sir? relates the suffering and despair of the Crucifixion of Jesus. What is often missed is the hopelessness at the time. Nowhere in the Gospels is anyone at the time predicting any positive possibilities beyond survival.

• Vincent of A wayfarer's notes has a problem with science and Christianity: one for self-definition as Science rather than a science, the other for thinking itself as the Truth rather than a truth.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot takes us into video from under the ocean with a twist of sorts on technology. Human adventurism is a kind of rebellion against evolutionary limitations.

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster promotes a strategy session for independent voters.

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger, has an angry piece at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST reprising French history pointing to a modern US conservative coup. Jack is a republican, with a small r. He makes the case that contemporary conservatives are Republicans, but not republicans or democrats.

• Michael John Scott, first citizen of Mad Mike's America, watches as Mitt Romney yells at his mirror and pretends it's President Obama. This time it's about Obama's Harvard background. Uh, Mitt spent more time at that very same university than did Barack Obama.

• James Wigderson explains why he didn't vote in this week's Wisconsin primary. Has to do with not having a preference between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, since either has an equal chance of defeating President Obama in November. We can hope that is true.

• Vixen Strangely at Rumproast deconstructs the unusual Republican formulation of Women's rights, comparing women with caterpillars. Actually the real message is that measures like contraception, vaginal probing, and medical care, are trivial issues conjured up by leftist Democrats. Women are much more concerned by real issues like the federal deficit. Meanwhile, polls indicate Mitt Romney suffering a deficit of his own, an 18 percent gap among women in swing states, and a gap of 34% among caterpillars.

• The Heathen Republican provides a good conservative analysis of the Constitution's Necessary and Proper Clause. The Necessary and Proper Clause essentially says that whatever actions are necessary are allowed to fulfill other measures that the Constitution does allow. My analogy is here. If I give you permission to drive my car, I can't object to the fact that you turned the ignition key, even though I didn't explicitly mention that. Heathen seems explicitly to embrace something very close to that, then says he disagrees with any interpretation that would "justify federal actions beyond the scope of the enumerated powers." The purpose of the Clause is to do exactly that, in support of other measures allowed by the Constitution. I suspect he means something different than my literalist mind casts on his words.

• Ryan at Secular Ethics reviews an important aspect of the legal argument over Obamacare. Is the mandate a tax? It's an important question. If it is, the court has to postpone consideration until the tax, or a fine, is applied, sometime in 2014. However, if the fines are issued under the Constitution's taxing authority, an argument made by the administration before the Supreme Court, the decision is automatic. It has to be Constitutional. Ryan offers a good analysis. Sadly, at least two Justices seem to unconcerned with actual legalities. Two more seem to be dependable partisans, and another is openly skeptical of the mandate. I'm guessing the issue on taxes is moot.

• The new politically correct definition of racist is anyone who points out actual racism. Tyler Perry alleges racial profiling. Chuck Thinks Right rolls his eyes, and just knows it must be bogus. His evidence is Perry's tinted windows. If he reads the story to which he links, he might learn that what Perry believes was profiling came after, not before, a legitimate traffic stop. I don't know that Perry is right. But Chuck knows for a fact Perry is wrong. Which tends to validate, not discredit, Tyler Perry's larger point.

• Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame analyzes the gap in how conservatives and liberals see the Treyvon Martin killing. He concludes the gap is largely non-existent, and is carried on only by the extreme edges of the right wing fringe. Most conservatives turn out, predictably enough, to be ... well ... human. I have to agree.

• The initial milquetoast official response to the Treyvon Martin slaying has provoked national outrage and some isolated grossly irresponsible actions. Did Spike Lee actually apologize for publicizing the wrong address? His reputation is that of a thoughtful director and sometime actor. Surely he doesn't think his moral culpability is limited to a factual error. Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame explores a dark corner of the irresponsible edges of conservatism. He calls out a right wing aggregation contained in "a one-stop shop by Human Events‘ John Hayward" and diligently chases down one conspiracy theory after another. What I like about Tommy Christopher is that he reports, as do most journalists, the he-said-she-said. But then he goes past much of contemporary journalism to document whatever turns out to be the facts - what journalism once was all about. You know. The truth.

• At the heart of the far-edge campaign against the slain teen is a theory that accepts an unusual way of looking at the world. They reject the commonly held explanation as an absurdity: that an armed adult notices a stranger, assumes that evil is color coded, that a young black teen on his way home to watch a football game is actually a desperate criminal, confronts the young man, and kills him. They instead adopt an alternate theory. The teenager, rushing home to a basketball game, in a strange coincidence, notices the same older, heavier adult, impulsively attacks him, and is killed. Both happened to notice each other at the same time. Each is motivated to confront the other. One is armed with a gun. The other with skittles. Extreme conservative FUNGAZI.COM comes out of several months dormancy to accept that theory as fact. Young Treyvon's death is a tragedy, but, now that the truth is out, we know he pretty much had it coming.

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster is kind of down at President Obama's halfhearted response to the killing of Treyvon Martin. I'm thinking it could be a caution about a fair trial. A lesson may be learned from President Nixon.

• Conservative Chuck at Chuck Thinks Right is plenty upset at Spike Lee for publishing a wrong address of the man who killed Treyvon Miller. This was before a public apology. I sometimes wonder if it occurs to anyone that Lee would have been flat out wrong if he had posted the correct address.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot calculates the odds of Mitt Romney becoming the GOP nominee. I'm less precise, using the quarter and shoe rule. I'd be willing to bet twenty five cents cash money on Rick Santorum, but I wouldn't bet my shoes.

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST, continues with his series considering the bumper sticker version of popular conservative beliefs about President Obama. If he isn't a socialist or a fascist, just what is President Obama?,

• Michael John Scott of Mad Mike's America suggests the possibility that Rick Santorum barely stopped himself from publicly using a racial slur in describing President Obama. I'm skeptical. The video Michael shows is strongly suggestive, but candidates do make a lot of stumbles. Some are bound to sound like something they aren't.

• Debra Dickerson reminds us that the greatest number of those getting a break from affirmative action are not members of a racial minority.

• Ryan (I'm almost positive) at Secular Ethics presents as alternate options, a series of possible arguments for Obamacare. My own minor objection to his approach is that the options are not all mutually exclusive. Good analysis. Clear, instructive, well written.

• Kent Pittman, writing from Open Salon is not making a rigid legal argument. He points out that if the Supreme Court kills Obamacare, it will take the form of a murder case for some folks who will not have medical care. Some will die.

• Dave Dubya points to a drastically under-reported threat to basic rights. Democracy is under attack by a well financed campaign of voter suppression. This time the new restrictions are in New Mexico.

• The Heathen Republican presents the conservative case against the United Nations. I'm following his reasoning until he gets to an implicit argument that mutual defense treaties like those setting up NATO are unconstitutional, as are treaties establishing agencies like the IMF to advance the economies of impoverished countries. I've always thought the pre-Cain 222 plan of the founders: Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, was pretty clear about treaties.

• In some part of the world, Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims regard each other as Ireland's protestants and Catholics once did, with extremists spawning violence. Slant Right's John Houk continues to take shortcuts, declaring that Islam is the enemy of Western culture and that only "Left Wing Multiculturalists" are "in denial of this fact." He reprints an anti-Islamic rant from FrontPage Magazine as evidence. Sigh.

• Our favorite John Myste at Mysterious Things adopts a conservative persona and explores opposition to science.

• Our erstwhile spiritual leader at Why do we have to do this, Sir? finds a new view of British unemployment as he interviews a daunting number of applicants for a teaching position.

• gil mann at Rumproast is more than a little irritated at Jimmy Carter. Partly it's President Carter's opinion on abortion. But this eloquent rant leads off with Carter's speculation that religion indirectly informs the morality of atheists. In the face of all that, I almost hate to say it, but I would probably drive gil to the dark side. Sorry, gil.

• Years ago, as a new employee, I was subjected to the unwanted attention of the office atheist. He had discovered in casual conversation that I was a committed Christian and he was looking for a good argument. I was up for it, but not during office hours. Lunch or after-hours coffee was rejected by my co-worker. I eventually left under a bit of a cloud, but quickly found other employment. PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, is a bit dismissive of a former computer analyst at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The analyst alleges he was dismissed because of his creationist views. Strangely, he introduced in court a fictional screenplay to illustrate his case. NASA says the guy insisted on haranging his coworkers during working hours and defied directives that he take it to his lunchtime or after hours. If that is true, and the coverage seems to indicate it is, the case ought to go against the former employee. Hard for me to go along with Pharyngula, though, who seems to me to imply that the guy is right in that he was fired for his religious beliefs and that NASA was right to do it for that reason. Or my interpretation of Pharyngula could be wrong. He is a bit ambiguous on the merits of the case, although not in his contempt for the fellow's brand of Christianity.

• Vincent of A wayfarer's notes reviews a good movie about Zen Buddhism, and finds himself thinking about Zen, another movie from the 1960s (as I recall), writings by John Muir, and a painting, a representation of which he produces. He composes all this, he says, while taking a walk. I believe him because he is a genius. Fascinating.

• Wow. My daughter once met a Music director who played on the piano several songs for us in the middle of of a St. Louis Nordstrom department store. She remarked to me that I have a talent for knowing really cool people. Here is another bit of evidence that she is right. Conservative James Wigderson in Wisconsin has received a prestigious award from the state newspaper association. Congratulations to James.

• Debra Dickerson considers the Treyvon Martin killing from a different perspective, with a 911 call from an elderly witness to a horrible crisis in which a dispatcher leaves cool police professionalism to exhibit warm police humanity. Most gentle kindness goes unrecognized. This writer makes sure one instance does not.

• Most folks take common sense steps to stay out of trouble. We've had conversations with our children. But if we, or a member of our families, are assaulted, most of us would not assign blame to anyone but the perpetrator. Vixen Strangely at Rumproast expresses the case well, taking on Geraldo Rivera of Fox who has an alternate theory of the Treyvon Miller gun-vs-skittles slaying. The hoodie was as much responsible as the killer. Kids should be more careful what they wear.

• Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame takes it up a notch with a bit of bitter satire. Maybe Congress should take up hoodie control legislation.

• Chuck Thinks Right makes the conservative case that other candidates should drop away and just back Mitt Romney.

• Peter lake of Mad Mike's America finds another angle to Mitt Romney's Etch A Sketch travails.

• The video has been around for a couple of months, I think, but Infidel 753 brings it back. Still pretty effective. Women reading the script as written by prominent Republicans. Jarring.

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster helps make the case against the man who makes the case against independent voters, as Jacqueline Salit takes on Ruy Teixeira.

• Jerry Critter at Critter's Crap brings a one sentence observation that says a lot about the direction of American wages. Not all bumper sticker points are shallow.

• A public resignation from Goldman Sachs has Kent Pittman, writing from Open Salon, pondering corporate personhood.

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger, has an angry piece at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST about a personal family experience with our US health care system.

• The Heathen Republican summarizes the latest administration economic report with such subheadings as "We don’t ask the poor to pay their fair share", "Yet another straw man", and "The root word of communism". A nuanced review.

• Conservative James Wigderson led a group which made an election-time mailing 15 years ago that was little more than a Be-Sure-And-Vote Reminder, and ended up fighting a protracted legal battle before winning complete vindication. Folks still bring it up as a negative, but its hard to see good citizenship as a negative. OH - and be sure to vote in November.

• Slant Right's John Houk warns of the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe.

• Vincent of A wayfarer's notes wishes he was warned ahead of time, but reviews the movie he attended anyway.

• Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk talks of faith but much theology as he gives us personal witness about prayer.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, brings us the story of Michael Pipkin. Pipkin flirted with stories of evolution, then encountered a Christian minister who explained the theory was completely against God. Pipkin was convinced, and has spent the rest of his life, so far, convinced there is no God. It is a warning to those of us in the faith that insistence on absurdity tends to put folks off.

• Why do we have to do this, Sir? recounts how a teenager answers questions about the First Cause argument on the Existence of God, and how his answer gets him into the penalty box.

• Our favorite John Myste at Mysterious Things presents a satiric account of a fellow guilty of the most horrible things who achieves salvation by dying at exactly the right time.

• Ryan (I'm pretty sure) at Secular Ethics examines conflicting ideas of free will, justice, and predestination. It's a good discussion, but I think of Isaac Bashevis Singer who, a generation ago, remarked "We have to believe in free will. We've got no choice."

In response to Burr Deming's Balanced Approaches and the Right to Vote

The real enemy of freedom comes from the balanced onlookers, the ones who start with the premise that the solution must come from the middle. If there is no actual problem, we must act to prevent the perception of a problem. Each side has a completely noble cause.

Shall we compromise, casting away only a portion of those 5 million voters? If we extend the hours of the additional offices that must be visited, perhaps only 4 million will be discouraged from completing the task? If the expense of the additional documentation is reduced, perhaps only 3,500,000? Would only 2,500,000 people turned away from voting be acceptable? 2,000,000? More?

The alternative of confronting falsehood, not with compromise, but with truth is ... well ... unbalanced.

After all, what is reasonable must always be somewhere between any two sides. Right?

- Burr Deming, March 21, 2012

The Right to Vote is a huge National concern now that we have those on one side of the debate who vigorously defend the right of ALL American citizens to cast one vote per election, while those on the other side of the debate simultaneously agree. The dispute has been brutally aggressive with neither side giving in, with both sides challenging the logic, and secretly the intelligence, of the other.

It would seem that there are as many as 5,000,030 votes at stake, or 5,000,060 depending on how you crunch the numbers.

In an effort to be balanced, I am going to change my stance on this issue for a second time. At first, I thought it was reasonable that proof of identity in the form of a photo ID be required. Even though I did not personally care for the suggested rule, I had to acknowledge that such a requirement has accepted precedent and that it makes some sense.

Later, when I learned that the national debate was not even about photo IDs, I changed my stance. With the help of an esteemed ally, I decided that it was completely unreasonable to require proof of identity in this unduly harsh form, because it disenfranchised those who were unwilling to get the identity. I suddenly realized that this was the topic of the national debate, which has nothing whatsoever to do with photo IDs, as I once presumed. The national debate is about whether or not to deny some citizens the right to vote. (Many thanks to Burr Deming).

I learned that it is all some folks can do to muster the energy to cast a ballot in the first place. Some people, approximately five million, are all but mindless skeletons, hobbling to the melody of their own disjointed and crackling bones, as they trudge their way to the voting booths. There they pray for guidance, lest, in their confusion, they expel the wrong chad, or circle the wrong circle or pull the wrong lever or push the wrong button and vote for the very tyrant who wants them to show their ID, as if they were in Communist China or something, in the first place. Not to mention those who forget where they went or why they are there before they can complete the task. We are now going to add pulling out an ID to their hassles? (or something like that. He explains it more eloquently).

After learning that the national debate was really about requiring an ID that we will deny to over five million people, I could no longer, in good conscious, remain sympathetic to the idea of Voter IDs. Like a rabid pendulum, I swung hard to the other side. I decided we MUST not allow the GOP to enact its two laws: 1. A voter ID is required. 2. Some people cannot have them.

However, after reading today’s current argument, I realize that this extreme swing is not really fair to the GOP.

Therefore, my new stance, my balanced stance, my wise stance, is this: I have to find one, and only one, of the two proposed laws to be reasonable. Let’s see. My balanced approach says that this law would be, hmmm. A state-issued picture ID is required to vote.

Now, if I were going to be reasonable, instead of balanced, I would change my stance to this:

Hmmm. Let’s see: a state-issued picture ID is required to vote.

However, I have no interest in reason. I choose balance. Therefore, I reject the second idea, the reasonable idea, in favor of the first, balance-driven idea.

Additionally, in an effort to be balanced, I declare my motivation to be both the stated liberal goal: every person gets vote per election / issue / candidate and simultaneously to the stated conservative goal: every person get one vote per election / issue / candidate.

I know what you are thinking: “John, you cannot side with both the liberals and the conservatives on this national debate. Despite the symmetry, it is a contradiction!” Yes, I used to think that too, but I have been where you are. In fact, I used to think just like you, back when I took sides. I was not balanced and therefore, not right. To know my wisdom, you must trace my steps, get tutored by those who study this; learn what the national debate is really about, and get the idea that it has anything to do with picture IDs out of your head: abandon your straw man.

Also learn that you are not interested in reason, but balance. You know this, because were it not true, you would have Burr Deming’s opinion, just as he does. Like him, you would be teeming with pride. You would be so proud that you would compose an article backhandedly renouncing balance, even when it is backed up by reasonable explanations, because when two sides disagree on something like this, it’s not about balance or reason. It’s just like slavery, one side is right and the other side is dead wrong, regardless of reason. “Reasons got nothing to do with it,” as Clint Eastwood never said.

John Myste also writes for his own site. Please visit John Myste Responds

Introduction, Traditional Service, March 12, 2012
St. Mark's United Methodist Church in Florissant, MO

 Our faith provides the sure knowledge 
 that our father sees in us 
 what we cannot see in ourselves, 
 a hard core value 
 we share with every human soul. 
 We know we are all precious in the sight of God. 
 
 The love of a parent for a child 
 is as close a bond as we can imagine. 
 A family, united by love, cares for each other, 
 casting no-one aside, leaving no-one behind. 
 
 We see Jesus, our brother, suffering for us, 
 and we keep his words in our hearts. 
 We look to all God’s children, 
 to so many who suffer. 
 No matter what inflames or separates us, 
 we know that we are family 
 with every human soul. 
 
 And we take care of our own. 


Found on Line:
"Kum Ba Yah"
African Gospel Choir, Dublin
Oba Nla Concert - Gospel Republic
November 12, 2011

• Infidel 753 finds a laboratory test for one of the most basic conservative tenets.

• Ryan (I presume) at Secular Ethics begins dry and ends up interesting. He guides us through the No True Scotsman fallacy, then applies it to political argument. Turns out Ryan is not really what you think he is.

• Seasons come and go but, in this particular season, Republican woes continue. Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame tells us of Pennsylvania's Republican Governor Tom Corbett efforts to do his part on a law forcing intrusive transvaginal ultrasound. "Just close your eyes?"

• The Heathen Republican offers a thoughtful analysis leading up to a conservative alternative to Obamacare. A bit hard on patients, but an alternative. Not mentioned is that Obamacare itself was once the Republican healthcare alternative.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, offers a helpful first step to Rick Santorum's promised war on pornography. Just a friendly suggestion.

• Words cannot describe what it is like having a loved one in Afghanistan. Ned at WisdomIsVindicated provides another reason to be thankful with two suggestions regarding our armed forces. We are thankful that his suggestions will likely never, ever, be followed. We would kind of like to have our young Marine back home safely.

• Chuck Thinks Right is disturbed at rumors that the UN might investigate Republican voter suppression efforts. I can suggest one clever counter measure. Stop suppressing the right of legitimate voters to cast their ballots. UPDATE: John Myste notes an irony in Chuck's indignation. See his comment here.

• Max's Dad finds a possible armchair psycho pattern for Rush madness. Psychobabble can be malicious fun.

• Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk takes a look at the mechanics of Rush advertising, explaining why Rush doesn't care about lost ads, and why he kind of does.

• Sometimes racism is so obvious you pretty much have to point it out, regardless of the peace-at-any-price racism deniers. Michael John Scott at Mad Mike's America provides the latest example. It's real. It's out there. It should be pointed out.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot still finds more ways to make technology fun. This week he writes about an amazingly high fall, a fall of many miles. Priceless video included.

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger, has a well informed piece at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST pretty much exploding one of the sillier name calling charges against President Obama.

• James Wigderson continues to cover the ongoing coverup of publicly funded giant guitars, one of the weirder scandals around.

• Betty Cracker at Rumproast reviews news reports of papers discovered at Osama bin Laden's death quarters in Pakistan. Seems the terrorist leader was terrified about the damage done by President Obama to al Qaeda. Strange how the terrorist anger was almost identical to that of American conservatives.

• Debra Dickerson recounts an amazing case of serial misconduct and wonders how far an attorney must go before getting disbarred.

• David Barton often quotes John Adams as having written a letter vigorously opposing any separation of church and state. What Barton knows, having examined the document himself, is that Adams was outlining a view so that he could disagree with it. Barton just leaves the people-who-believe-this-are-pathetic part off. Barton does this sort of thing often, without conscience. He is as dishonest a polemicist as you will ever find purporting to be an historian. Not to put too fine a point on it, he lies in service to the Lord. T. Paine, at Saving Common Sense, describes Barton as "a brilliant historian with nearly encyclopedic knowledge of America’s history". He then uses Barton as his source to prove President Obama is hostile to Judeo-Christian religion. T. Paine is a long time friend and contributor, often willing to educate me on the virtues of conservatism. I'll try and come up with some conservative historian with more integrity. It's the least I can do to help out a real friend.

• Al Stefanelli, Georgia State Director for American Atheists, inhabits Mad Mike's America. He takes note of the Republican war on the separation of Church and State. He responds with a warning about the founders' original intent being undermined by majoritarianism, as the Christian horde overrules the freedom of atheists. Neglected is the possibility that some of us in the Christian majority would stand with those who do not share our faith.

• Rumproast's Gil Mann is shocked at video proving that a young Obama once embraced a liberal black professor with a full body fist bump, thereby proving that the President hates America and wants to jail white people. Or something. Maybe that he was for gay rights? Jon Stewart questions whether their nipples touched. I suspect Gil Mann of sarcasm. Read for yourself.

• Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame watches as Soledad O'Brien doesn't let a Breitbart successor, the new Editor-in-chief at Breitbart.com, get by with smearing President Obama with the body-bump-video. Tommy notes that the site tries to slam O'Brien in return, but makes an embarrassing error during the attack. Worthy of a snicker or two.

• Slant Right's John Houk has discovered that President Obama is actually a Kenyon. I wonder about Arizona Governor Jan Brewer simply pointing her finger when she rushed up the tarmac to confront America's Commander in Chief. Maybe she was trying to arrest and deport this most notable of illegal aliens.

• Chuck Thinks Right uses a so's-your-old-man defense on behalf of Rush. Think of all the others who have done said so much worse. Those on the left. Those ignored by media. Those who pretty much run one of the political parties. Okay, so Rush is the only one who does that. Still, misogyny is wrong no matter the source.

• Manifesto Joe of Texas Blues has an answer, though, on the Rush question. Has to do with quality and quantity of the abuse.

• Dave Dubya reminds us of the target of the Limbaugh attacks. It wasn't Sandra Fluke.

• Max's Dad has a great visual graphic representation of the travails of Rush.

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster reports that young voters are becoming independent of party identification.

• Jerry Critter is back (Yay!) at Critter's Crap with Bad Lip Reading video speeches by the remaining GOP candidates. Did they really say all that?

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST, previews the coming general election. He seems to feel we'll have a choice, not an echo.

• Infidel 753 finds a video of the single individual Rick Santorum accuses of masterminding all these years of progressive change.

• The Heathen Republican plays a bit of rhetorical jujitsu on those of us who criticize Mitt Romney for bellicose talk about Iran. Fair is fair.

• Wisconsin conservative James Wigderson continues his investigation into municipally financed Giant guitars, complete with diagrammed specs. Darnedest scandal you'll ever read about.

• Ned Williams at Wisdom Is Vindicated finds research indicating the capacity for politeness, more than IQ, may predict success in life.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, takes a militant approach to his birthday. I'm getting to the age where I hum through Happy Birthday so I can remember my name. Happy Birthday dear Bur-urr.. That's it. Burr.

• Vincent of A wayfarer's notes visits farm country and finds beauty in agriculture. Actually, Vincent finds beauty pretty much everywhere. Maybe the source is within the observer.

• Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk is inspired to wit and wisdom by Facebook.

• Our favorite John Myste at John Myste Responds proposes that, when it comes to beliefs, reasoning and actual reasons are often independent of each other.

• Ryan (I think) at Secular Ethics responds to John's observation creatively. Don't worry, he seems to say, evolution will conquer all.
  (Update: Ryan points out that I got it all wrong. He's right. Click to see why)

• Why do we have to do this, Sir? speculates with women he knows about man-flu, a malady women never get, and creatively segues into a holy confrontation with a parent.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot considers the role of technology in deciding the outcome of the Civil War. Remember the Monitor!

• Manifesto Joe of Texas Blues has cruised the internet and discovered ten laws that govern the GOP.

• Our favorite John Myste at John Myste Responds visits here to predict the continued well being of the Republican Party.

• The Heathen Republican reprises a political version of the Drake equation. Generations of physicists used variations of Professor Frank Drake's formula to calculate the odds of life on other planets. Heathen considers odds of a Republican President reducing the federal budget. It is a creative approach, but Heathen comes away a bit daunted.

• Tim McGaha at Tim's Thoughtful Spot visits the betting professionals, discovers the odds, and tells us who will be President this time next year. Okay, he just tells us the probabilities.

• Jerry Critter at Critter's Crap demonstrates that investors pretty much always make more money when Democrats are in office. Okay. It's working so far in the Obama administration, isn't it?

• Papamoka at Papamoka Straight Talk makes the Republican case for denial of contraception. I suspect he is not entirely sincere.

• Conservative satire can be a dangerous thing. Medical philosophers Dr Alberto Giubilini and Dr Francesca Minerva present a Jonathan Swift type of case against after-birth abortion. You may recall Swift from your high school history. He wrote A Modest Proposal in protest against English starvation policies which were aimed at the troublesome Irish. Swift suggested the solution would be for the Irish to engage in cannibalism, dining on their infants. Giubilini and Minerva take a similar approach in the British Journal of Medical Ethics. They propose that "it should be permissible to kill newborn babies because they don’t have the “same moral standing as actual persons."

  Fox News misses the point, so do bloggers from pretty much everywhere. Since Chuck Thinks Right is a devoted follower of Fox, he asks what his readers think. He links to the Fox News article about those liberal monsters. Some of these folks will be found under stairwells giggling as they listen to Rush describe women as sluts. Liberals don't get that sort of humor. As for Giubilini and Minerva, they might consider reaching their conservative audience on its own level. If they want to write satire for the Journal of Medical Ethics, get it placed in the comic book version.

• Rumproast's Betty Cracker takes the easy road, catching Mitt Romney in a drama filled position reversal. Romney takes pretty much any request, playing whatever songs his audience wants to hear. The press pretty much does bare due-diligence and moves along. Keep going, nothing here to see, folks.

• Nancy Hanks at The Hankster explains all the vitally important stuff libertarians are doing to get their act together for a third party thing this year.

• Max's Dad watches Senator Ben Nelson get ready to leave, and considers what comes next. He compares Nelson with former Senator Bob Kerrey and has hopes the Republic will come out ahead on the deal.

• James Wigderson, still investigating public investment in giant guitars, is told someone ate the Mayor's email messages. I keep thinking we're being punked. Maybe he should write for the Journal of Medical Ethics.

• Tommy Christopher of Mediaite fame is shocked and saddened by the death of his good friend Andrew Breitbart. One would think the victims of Breitbart's video smear editing might feel less fond, but one, Shirley Sherrod, holds all reaction except sympathy for the family.

• Jack Jodell, friend of the working blogger at THE SATURDAY AFTERNOON POST, contrasts the lives of Breitbart and another public person who also died of a heart attack this week. RIP Davy Jones.

• Infidel 753 takes note of radio host Rush Limbaugh, in his role as primary voice of the Republican point of view, attacking women who take birth control. My take is here.

• PZ Myers, writing for Pharyngula, reposts words from E. Knight of canada on Why I Am An Atheist. It is a sort of recurring series for Myers, and it is instructive. He concludes with "Why do people have a problem with Atheists again?" Good question, to which I have no answer. I posted the opposite view a couple of weeks ago, inspired in part by one of PZ Myers' pieces. I truly do not understand the hostility of some toward those who do not believe.

• Why do we have to do this, Sir? has a brief graphical warning about dancing during worship.

• Ryan (I think) at Secular Ethics describes a premise about beliefs as rationalizations, then prescribes a rational means of discovering truth.

• Mad Mike's America hosts Dan Abshear. Dan had a bad experience a couple years back and contemplates what a month in prison on false charges did to his outlook.