Mocumentary: Expelled (Exposed?)

Featured DO NOT SEE!
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. *

Idol Chatter: Pre-Screaming.
Reuters: No "Intelligence" evident in Stein documentary Post comment.
Angry Astronomer reports.

An unwilling participant!
And a Willing participant?

* OK, see the trailer, which is admittedly more a mocumentary.

[Now I will add my only little discourse:

Fear Based Blame Game

Speaking of Labeling, I did not know I would go here. It is not a matter of Faith. It is a matter of evidence. Not that faith is wrong to have. But it must be based on evidence. Of course there is evidence for faith. But can you question faith? You can question evidence. But would you have faith in unquestioned evidence? Evidence can give you an answer, if you have a question. If you have faith in unquestioned evidence, can you question faith? If it is a matter of freedom, would anyone choose freedom from evidence? Would anyone choose freedom from faith?

Of course this is just a ramble. Unless one chooses to answer, whether you have faith in evidence or no evidence. Would anyone base their answers on a writer, actor, economist, lawyer? Just because a dog does not all of a sudden become a cat, does not mean that things don’t change, and not always for the better. But apparently with intelligent design, anyone can be anything, no matter their department or intelligence. There is now evidence for that.]

[[If the above ramble is hard to follow, maybe reading the following will help.
The Information Challenge by Richard Dawkins -- Maybe not, but it may make it seem easier. (It may also be helpful to point out that this is only an example used by unwilling participant above.) ]]

[04-22-08: more links on Expelled - -
PZ Meyers Expelled, Gains Sainthood -
Lying for Jesus - (nfry)

It is one of the classic philosophical fallacies to derive an 'ought' from an 'is'. Stein (or whoever wrote his script for him) is implying that Hitler committed that fallacy with respect to Darwinism. If we look at more recent history, the closest representatives you'll find to Darwinian politics are uncompassionate conservatives like Margaret Thatcher, George W Bush, or Ben Stein's own hero, Richard Nixon. Maybe all these people, along with the Social Darwinists from Herbert Spencer to John D Rockefeller, committed the is/ought fallacy and justified their unpleasant social views by invoking garbled Darwinism. Anyone who thinks that has any bearing whatsoever on the truth or falsity of Darwin's theory of evolution is either an unreasoning fool or a cynical manipulator of unreasoning fools. I will not speculate as to which category includes Ben Stein and Mark Mathis.

Faith in doubt and inquiry -
Related video link:
'New' American Theology of Civil Submission - ]

Borrow and Twist- a surfing metaphor?

Oh what a web we weave or mobius strip we ravel. I was going give a shout out earlier as a wake-up for the upcoming Justice Sunday events, but they may hopefully make it through the “so called Liberal” media filters. But cutting through the mangled message is not that difficult if you follow the borrow and twist method that has been my habit: You must simply take their statements or labels and sort out the facts. Well maybe not even that.

The so called aim of JCCCR.org is "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith". There basically is no judicial war on faith except theirs. They are actually fighting for their Truth and they are against anything else, especially Faith. Faith by definition is not Truth but actually depends on not knowing or having facts. It is even divorced from logic. Even this concept is not exactly absolute, but relative. Having knowledge, be they facts or understanding, does not rule out faith.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with faith. Truth is also part of the process, but understanding and faith are not strangers to it.

All links in this post were only glanced at, either during or after the process. The Al Franken Show and the mention of upcoming guests, from Andrew Sullivan.com to People for the American Way also deserve some credit for getting me rolling, but I probably missed some valuable comments while processing this and going overboard with definitions and links.

Certainty out-sources faith.

[Saved from 10-18-04 10:03:00 AM]

It may not be those that think they know that are the problem, but those that don’t know they only think. Faith by definition rules out knowing. Faith believes in something that cannot be known. It has nothing to do with knowing what others should believe.

Separation of church and state has nothing to do with religion and government but with the freedom to progress with faith in society. Far from the being about the issue of marriage, is the actual divorce of reason from authority.

Keep Up the Beat

There is some ironic optimism here, or maybe not. Either optimism or ironic? I don't know, maybe later.
But in catching up, I hope to refer back.

SO HERE! AND Here's to catching up. [the link below gives post cryptic credit to a similar idea]

11-4-04 [A rougher draft was sent to others and other chronological changes are partially self contained.]
Good News! The campaign is over. But the fight will go on. How is what matters. Words matter too. For Bush and for the rest of US.

Grammar, syntax and words and deeds are all connected. Where we are going may not be that different. How we get there is all right to debate. For lack of a letter or number of letters words, can change, and changes matters. Words become works or deeds can become dead.

Anyway, faith means acting without knowing. If knowing comes first, we may get somewhere else, let alone not need faith. Faith in the process is needed, but it too, must not be assumed.

Where was I going? Optimism.
I know I wrote the first three words before beginning my editing the way I wrote it, and actually 6 words before I had to add a but. I had already written the sentiments of first paragraph and its six sentences before I found the link below. [Bush wants ‘consequential presidency’; Dems & GOP look to future] And I had only scrolled down a bit, before my eyesight landed on the following words. [See Link: Russert On Politics]
"A very important point about second terms — people forget — Ronald Reagan, in his second term, went about an arms control pact with the Soviet Union — his arch-enemy."

My second paragraph reflects where I make a tangential leap. Hopefully the rest is useful advice. We must face Bush and ourselves, with as he says, faith and confidence or was it vice versa.

Now I will read the rest of his story before rehashing my stuff.

[Italics will generally mean context notes that may have been added or hopefully help, and represent some of the evolution or editing involved in my processing, seeing has my backlog is due to reaching out closer to home.]

"This is the policy, what happened?"'

"The Moment Has Come to Get Rid of Saddam": Bush's Faith Run Over by History By Mark Danner
TomDispatch.com

The only thing that worries me about you is your optimism.
- Spanish Prime Minister José María Aznar to President Bush, from the Crawford Transcript of February 22, 2003

I was an optimist too.

And wrote about the nexus of faith.

Looking at causes and cures is a tricky business. If leaps can be taken, they should have been of faith in the process. If action before discussion is selected by the most civilized, how can we hope for different in those we chastise or fear and yet hope to civilize?

"WAR MADE SIMPLE" has an interesting nexus to power.

It is a link that I just found but had they it in mind?

Poetic Justice

Right Face Left Faith

Great minds think alike
But being alike does not make right
Being right may make might
But more important is thinking
Right?

Being right is more likely
Why great minds will think alike
Thinking may not be so likely
In those that just think might
Right.

Faith is nowhere near alike
The truth that others think is might
Faith is might and more like maybe
Unless you only think it's right
Not maybe!

(link to updated commentary)

Fearnauts
There is no good and evil.
There are only goods and needs
and wants, and no freedom
from them.

So work on the good,
not just the goods
and justice will flow,
not evil.

Fear not but face good
and fear will fly.
Fearnauts may fly,
but will is not
just the stuff of dreams.

Fear may be,
but results,
don’t have to be
but will.

(not to mention psychology and physics)

Unified Poem

Everything
is but
a Wave
between
perspectives
in Time
and Space

(Theme: Fear of Disciplines in particular Economics.)
[This falls in the tinkering and filing category, not to mention labels or discipline, let alone hiatus. Hint? In Updated find #6 ]Or Bottom line? Or writing for the right?

[Irony of all ironies or poetic justice, I must admit to an erroneous leap myself. Long story short:"Further evidenced by what runs fourth in this search: "lying in ponds", by William Safire, a study of partisanship I will spare for later. But look to the section he titled Philosophy, a word he equated with "blow(ing) smoke"** when referring to Dean." "Philosophical" was a word he used to lower the boom on Dean, but it was not he but about him(Safire) in which Lying in Ponds had a category of Philosophy. Which does not really shake my perspective, but complicates references to #6 and bumps into #7.]

Geometry of Purpose

Belated Congratulations for Fives Years
on Permanent Defense
Celebrating 5 years of facing the offensive likes of the Right,
and the offensive on the government and the middle class by
the likes of those like Tim Eyman.

Not that "3 strikes yer out" * does not work for baseball or should not be used to put repeat offenders in jail. It is too bad that at that rate Eyman is not at least out of the initiative business.

Geometry? Well there is the baseball diamond,
and then there is my paradigm I call The Power Broker Mountain Project [PBMP].
But I am thinking more of the parallel efforts which are being made not always in touch with each other, but headed in the same direction. My recent refocus on the local, means finetuning the approaches.

Two related efforts:
Not wanting to do justice to Culture Warrior Bill O'Reilly, I have coined, borrowed or claimed the position of Cultural Physicist, where everything matters. This effort led me to checking on an Internet parable (scroll down to The Tomato Company) and found the following Global Intelligence Briefing for CEOs found at The Braden Files by one Herb Meyer who by one American Thinker: "knocks the ball out of the park, explaining concisely and clearly the nature of the challenges facing Western Civilization."

And if I may connect more dots(and the ball park metaphor was not what I was going for) but I recall my poems on these parallels of sorts(the likes of who come to mind).

Right Face Left Faith

Great minds think alike
But being alike does not make right
Being right may make might
But more important is thinking
Right?

Being right is more likely
Why great minds will think alike
Thinking may not be so likely
In those that just think might
Right.

Faith is nowhere near alike
The truth that others think is might
Faith is might and more like maybe
Unless you only think it's right
Not maybe!

The physicist point?

Unified Poem

Everything
is but
a Wave
between
perspectives
in Time
and Space

Now to continue the path, and thanks again for the work of Andrew Villeneuve and Permanent Defense.

* just another initiative as segue

BUSH AD
Demos can make a gain
[Printed 3-10-04, King County Journal]
My title:
Freedom, Faith, Family and Sacrifice Reminds Us.

From what I have seen of the first Bush ad, it is surprisingly honest. The words freedom, faith, family and sacrifice are prominent principles on parade. The images of victims and heroes bring feelings that are shared by all of us.

The Democrats could be tempted to hope it is continually run until the Freudian nature of it sinks in.

Why was a fourth ``F'' word not worked in for literary sake? Would it be too much reminder of the four freedoms of FDR? Would it be their avoidance of words like fear and failure, which would fit this administration and its lost faith in processes?

Sacrifice is appropriately chosen instead and we should be reminded who and what is being sacrificed. Since Sept. 11, 2001, there may be a new equation.

But we must do better than the fuzzy math and facts that change for this administration or it is only a dangerous formula. These images and feelings are real and valid but they make little difference, until they are followed up by words and actions that mean something

Supreme Court Jest Ice?

Where is the ice going? Well here is where it is coming from:

The New Yorker*: Rational Irrationality.

Well, not exactly: Obamacare Supreme Court Case is a Bad Joke.

Actually I will be intentionally preemptive**.

Is it some form of martial arts political calculus?

Maybe I have too much hope for Obama or too much faith in The New Yorker.

Bottom line, I have yet to read the article, but wanted to jump*** on the band wagon.(NOT!)

Not to make a federal case out of it, but I do intend to read more on this later.

* not that I have read it yet, but I like the heading.

** Jujitsu before reading.

*** case study[!] Reid sarcastic[!] Me...not read[!]

(also see "federal": not to mention Romney on Russia and Leno.)

[Seattle Times ]

[3-29-12 ALEC: Stand your Ground, Supreme Court Activism/ both sans comment.]

[Follow-up:

Seattle Excerpts, interesting hodge-podge of exchanges. If the constitution is not a living document, what is federalism? Killing two ironies in one comment?

Justice Antonin Scalia: Mr. Kneedler, what happened to the Eighth Amendment? You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages? And do you really expect the court to do that? Or do you expect us to give this function to our law clerks? Is this not totally unrealistic? That we're going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?

Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler: Well ...

Times "seemingly split over ideology"/

But Roberts and Kennedy also asked enough pointed questions of the law's challengers to give the overhaul's supporters some hope. In any event, justices' questions at arguments do not always foretell their positions.

Activism: "Justices Split".

Intentionally: Read Healthcare Jujitsu, Political Jujitsu, what's the difference? The party and the people. It would seem to me that Obama is the master, even without single payer as a goal. It might be called "free market" jujitsu where that is what could be flipped by even an option. The "free market" economic fantasy is under threat of being flipped as the fraud it is, under even the offer of competition. Maybe there is the jest ice.

Tangent of the day.^

[See original lede: Bingo on Faith, in paragraph two. Almost Bingo cubed !^^]

^ now that is an irony

^^ see bold "two" link re:cubed, but apologies for last four links.^^^

^^^ or penta coastal or cost us [!]

[Fixing News: as opposed to breaking, I must update the Fixing . But what kind of market is it when if you don't participate you die? Ask Raw Money. On the other hand, he is correct: "We can't play the game like that." Let alone are banking and insurance really commerce? I they aren't, maybe they aren't people, maybe they are Leviathan? i.e. governments bailiwick or not!][Ed on Hannity: the journalist calling the journalist read, or the con calling the convict con(pot meet kettle/camel meet domino) ]

[3-30-12 Justices Meet...

Book Review De...viewed... not to put a spin or pun on it. But I will depun a bit on the self-fulfilling profits. ]

What is TheLiaisonReport?

In noting my lack of comment on the Fort Hood tragedy [last Thursday*], a commemoration of the Berlin Wall coming down [today], as well as the upcoming Veteran's Day [this Wednesday], I did not want to just make gratuitous/obligatory commentary or cracks, but must note their passing.

The word *** "animus" tripped me up in a recent essay. Just how does this tie in? Maybe between the geek and the week, or the will and the weak.

[* my thoughts as the news broke: It seemed that the snippets of detail that are still coming out, told a story of failure of process if not un-intentional derilection of duty, in putting together the potential triggers for a disturbed personality. They include: the stress of his duties dealing with stressed soldiers, his being a psychiatrist who did want to be deployed, a recent poor performance rating, not to mention his(I don't want to say "so-called")faith**. ]

** this is not to diminish faith nor emphasize the Islamic connection, but ideology might be a better word or the irony of the word associations.

[Belated links: encyclicals, stress and cracks.]

[11-10-09: update on Fort Hood investigation. There is an interesting loopiness in the lack of connecting the dots, and that is between the talk and the action. It is also reflected in the difficult aspects that determine whether this will be a military or terrorism prosecution. It is more deeply embedded in the insanity of a defense for an offensive act, unjustified if there were not such a loopiness. This is not to justify the act, nor ridicule crazy talk. But I am connecting the act of justifying preemption with violence, over preemption with caution, to a failure to talk about justice preemptively.]

[11-11-09 update Obama at Fort Hood ]

*** 11-11-09 bold added as a hint in this paragraph

Said Relief?

Who said, he Said, they said.

Egypt Update.
Speaking of Journalism** or freedom's intent.
Other Associations and Said Groups...

Note preemptive nature of links, as not all are read fully nor sometimes more than scrolled over.

In that vein, here is another mid-read comment--
--
The Prophet Margin* or "Decartes Bones"(not 2 mention) quote:(p.XIX)

Most people seem to be caught between these tidal currents--the pull to faith and tradition in a dangerous world, the argument that religion is at the core of the world's problems and only a revived commitment to individual freedoms and rights will steer humanity into a better future.

Colin Slee said about England:"You have a triangle with fundamentalist secularists in one corner, fundamentalist faith people in another, and then the intelligent, thinking liberals of Anglicanism, Roman Catholicism, baptism and methodism, other faiths--and, indeed, thinking atheists--in the other corner."

--

* my characterization although I do not necessarily appreciate the characterizations that follow, but it is the Ge Oh Me Try, not to mention who is at the table.

** link lost in editing(still looking) maybe found.
[along the same line, the first link is too embedded in comment on journalism and comment, while the last link on "freedoms"(edit to possessive)is embedded with preemptive history and irony
(ex. Alexander Hamilton against the Bill of Rights, yet for a National Bank.)]
[Journalism link now replaced and here is an un-embedded link from it.]

Speaking of Relief:or spin zones or characterizations. 'nO'Really!

[Said Review: Post an achronism. (Relative to perspectivism)]

"A flip-flop should be no handicap."

Richard Dawkins points to his own flip-flop on Amotz Zahavi's Handicap Principle [*] and how it fits in with his own theory in The Selfish Gene. The point is not that anyone has a handicap, but that those that do, must be actually more successful to survive or are selected by a mate (or voter) for that reason. However, the traslation from the math to the biology to the sociology has a handicap. The math. Most people will follow a meme whether they follow the math or the meme. Meaning they will follow a leader whether they know the meme or they are just mean. But flip-flopping on a meme, does not mean the results will be progess.

If this has not been followed I will leave it anyway. Politics is not science, science not a religion, and religion is not faith. Faith is another story.[**] But cost is a reality that can't always be calculated and takes more than economists.

[*] last article on link
[**] first article
[also see comments on Richard Dawkins to the left in first link]

BTW: flip-flop is no joke in physics, let alone other fields -- not to mention nuance

[Follow-up: Changing my religion. Roger Bingham (second-to-last article)and The Light Side of Locality (third article). Or Hubris and Humor?]

Speaking of Sarcasm

Opinion: Critics and Foreign Policy.
Will Imam Abdul Rauf be taken for his word?

A Cult Classic.

It seems that intolerance is a lack of faith, yet that does not mean that a minority is right. 'Nuff said? Well, intolerance should be opposed, but that is the paradox. Especially when the intolerant see the intolerance for intolerance and think they are about tolerance. If the vicious cycle cannot be seen, then check the definition of faith, especially in one's own beliefs.

Obama is Obama!

Not an FDR, nor a Truman,
and most definely* not a Bush,
burning or not, but a man of faith.
Faith in our Founding Fathers,
and team leaders not just cheer leaders.

[Bold is speech link, like it or not.]
* definitely also

[6-16-10: Ironically I think I nailed it: Obama stayed his course. He can't exactly "Go Bush on us", but he intends to get it done, with our help.]

"The irony..."

(in turning pages)

...is that Americans have been experiencing a lot of change in their lives attributable to these historic events, and some of those changes have distressed many American families-- job loss, failing schools, prohibitively expensive health care, pensions at risk, entitlement programs approaching bankruptcy, rising gas and food prices, to name a few. But your government often acts as if it is completely unaware of the changes and hardships in your lives. And when government does take notice, often it only makes matters worse. For too long, we have let history outrun our government's ability to keep up with it. * The right change will stop impeding Americans from doing what they have always done: overcome every obstacle to our progress, turn challenges into opportunities, and by our own industry, imagination and courage make a better country and a safer world than we inherited.

(in three paragraphs ...we... can agree) but he continues.

The wrong change looks not to the future but to the past for solutions that have failed us before and will surely fail us again. I have a few years on my opponent, so I am surprised that a young man has bought in to so many failed ideas. Like others before him, he seems to think government is the answer to every problem; that government should take our resources and make our decisions for us. That type of change doesn't trust Americans to know what is right or what is in their own best interests. It's the attitude of politicians who are sure of themselves but have little faith in the wisdom, decency and common sense of free people. That attitude created the unresponsive bureaucracies of big government in the first place. And that's not change we can believe in.

It is not fair of me to pick on "a few" words that bring up age, since it is valid as well, that Obama is young, but not that he has bought in to what is old, but maybe what works. And McCain has bought in to change, but who has bought in to him? It is good that attitude is brought up as well as faith, not to mention the people. But it is not these words that must be brought up, but the forces of history that must be held up to scrutiny and evaluation.

* "for too long" we have let Bushisms outrun our media filters(them and us). Have they been vetted enough to not get used to this? [...this run around? and I just caught a mis-embedded link, bottom lined**, that fits. The Bush exit strategy may be a good example of a Catch-44. Where is McCain? [Let me make perfectly clear,*** the above block quotes are direct from McCain's speech and three paragraphs in the gap are commendable] Where will the Democrats be? And where have they and Republicans been in "your government". I was going to say the bold was on me, but it also on you and on them (?).

** previous post bottom link
*** bonus hint

[final comment: "The irony" is that McCain's words start a paragraph here as well as a serious tone, while it is ironic that I saw any humor (not) in age earlier.]

Flash Words

and Holey Math!
The words are not as bad* as the math or the understanding of the checks and balances and full faith in budgets or IOU's.

* Picking up from the last link(or 2) in the last post I must note the biased(although that is relative)source(mediaite) and dig out the Paul Krugman and Peter G. Peterson sources above. And I have to say that there is no comparison to the "gotcha journalism" of recent controversy. Commissioner Simpson was the aggressor who stood his ground in error or at least two worlds, confusing the IOU's with the Lock Box. i.e. the double hit is not, except for the interest that is robbing Paul to not pay Peter. No pun on sources, but I must note that we have a strange convergence of agreement, Simpson must go or actually be used to school the debate. But I will unthread these sources to D-Day(the Derivatives article) in Progressive Breakfast with a side of Simpson a link to Krugman, and from him to The Fiscal Times(of Peter G. Peterson). Has one ever seen such bipartisan agreement that Simpson should go for several reasons?[bold added 1-31-11] But does it not boil down to this? The double hit is really a double pick pocket or some such farther from faith and credit to government.

[Post-comment updates] [and more]

Trickle on the Buck.

It should sound familiar to paraphrase former FEMA director Michael Brown: to go balls to the walls to cut red tape. Since their end game is to drown the government in a bath tub, it ironic to expect another layer of bureaucracy to make the process work better. It is not only another layer that communications needs to go through but responsibility to be passed on to.

What school of management says to simply cut the red tape and simply let another layer know that there is a problem? Just who has the responsibility after the red tape is cut and how is the job done and by whom? It should be obvious that by drowning a government of, by and for the people, only the people will suffer. Things don’t get done by faith or fiat, it takes a structure that these people have no faith in, let alone competence.

Keep Up the Faith

[11-6-04 I woke up to this thought in rough form and have not had to tweak it much.]

Some people don’t understand that faith is not knowing,
knowing is not understanding,
and freedom is not from religion.

This may seem like a cycle that some try to break out of
and some try to break into, but others can not tell them which.
There may be absolutes, there may be knowing,
but finding them together is another divide
it is no ones job to close
but which each of us may find the need to.

SHARED SACRIFICE [NOT 4F]

I have not seen the first Bush ad, but NPR reviewed it and from what they said it was surprisingly honest. I did not get the full wording but the words FREEDOM, FAITH, FAMILY and SACRIFICE were the prominent values that were on parade. The images of mangled victims and brave firefighters were connected with this message. While tempting to point out that the fourth F of FAILURE would be more appropriate, the word sacrifice is something that we should all share.

The Democrats are a party of unity not division. We share the values of freedom, faith, family and more importantly sharing sacrifices.

Post "don't ask, don't tell"^ ?

Re: The Cycle*** 
In your(1) Facebook**, or post something^^ or other.*

*Lede or Ship(saved in draft) 
**anacronyism/acronomiters(ditto) and tangents /[(Re:(fn)]
i.e. Heading lost in the process.
*** Bazinga!(c-aster risks)
[Pred-Haidt?]
[Post whatism is the key to the lost heading above.]

[Sea-#PO aka C-uncap-3PO: Ouch! That's the ticket!  Speaking of rise/run: War is a last resort, and some people don't know a resort from a hole in the ground.]
The Cycle^ File ? *or*not*

[^ post "don't ask don't tell"(not to mention?[!])
^^ scroll over ]

Note Labels: Saved in Draft, Under Construction...ostensibly complete.
[Pregame Gut Check]
[Post Game Re-Cap: Tide Rolls.]

1-8-13  See what the gut gives us? (Tuesday Morning quarter-backing?) Our Lady of little faith, see "mistakes" crack, under Rolls.  While the Crimson Tide rolled, it was certainly arising, with an un-named tune floating in my head.
(1) links inserted 1-8-13  Our Story / Morning Joe?(2) / Post "don't ask, don't tell"^ ? 
(speaking of Up Swift Creak:  Bane Or for Haggle?)