I hate how the media is breathlessly reporting that EIGHTEEN PERCENT of Americans now believe that the president is a Muslim.
First off, I realize that the same eighteen percent... plus about eighty per cent more... don't know what's in our Constitution and can't be forced to read it, but it says that NO office holder shall be subjected to a religious test. In other words, even if the president WERE a Muslim, which he's clearly not, it wouldn't matter.
Second off...
Eight percent of Americans... or almost half as many as believe the president's a Muslim... believe that Elvis is alive.
Twenty-two percent of Americans believe in Ghosts.
As many as thirty-six percent believe that Mr. Bush orchestrated 9/11. Seriously overestimating the man, in my opinion.
Thirty-four percent of Americans “believe” in UFO's. I qualify that because the term “UFO” has lost all of it's real meaning. If you see something flying that you can't identify, it is, BY DEFINITION, a UFO. They clearly exist. That's like asking if people believe in rocks. I interpret this as meaning that thirty-four percent of Americans believe that the Earth is routinely being visited by extra-terrestrial craft.
Six percent of Americans believe that the moon landing was faked. Bear in mind, as you read that statistic, that, if you have a powerful enough telescope, you can actually SEE the crap that we left up there.
Thirty-nine percent of Americans “believe” in evolution. I qualify that again, this time because you cannot believe or disbelieve a scientific theory – you can either accept or reject the proofs. So I have to assume that correct wording for this would be “thirty-nine percent of Americans reject the proofs of Darwinian evolution”.
A whopping forty-four percent of Americans believe that the Biblical creation story... as impossible as it is... is literally true.
Twenty percent of Americans... can't locate America on a map. How sad is that. (I remember a related poll that I saw while living in Alaska taken among graduates of some college... eight percent of them thought that Alaska was another planet.)
Twenty percent of Americans don't know WHO we declared independence from in 1776.
The same percentage... probably the same PEOPLE... think that Bush was a “great” president.
Twenty percent of Americans believe that the sun revolves around the Earth.
Twenty percent of Americans... probably twenty percent of human beings in any age... believe that “the apocalypse” will happen in their lifetime. Also note that the definition of “the apocalypse” has changed over the ages. Currently it is the apocalypse as spelled out in the last book of the Bible, the Revelation to Saint John the Divine.
Twenty percent of Americans believe that marijuana is more harmful than alcohol. I can't help but wonder how many of these people actually KNOW someone who has been harmed by pot? I know a handful... versus hundreds that I know or THOUSANDS that I know OF who have been harmed by alcohol or its effects.
Twenty percent of Americans believe that the lottery, despite its odds of one in MILLIONS, is a sound financial “investment”.
Do you get what I'm saying here? One in five Americans will believe any idiotic thing that you tell them. That doesn't make it true, and it DEFINITELY doesn't make it NEWS.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Friday, August 20, 2010
Stop Beating Up My Language!
I just need to rant here for a second, okay? This isn't political, and is only tangentially about society. If you want to skip it, my feelings won't be hurt.
I've encountered what I consider to be some rather egregious misuses of the language lately and wanted to address them here.
If you work in food service, your smallest size is a small, okay? Regardless of WHAT your marketing department tells you to call them, you DO have a small – it is your smallest size. Years ago, marketing departments decided that “small” had negative connotations, so they started to tell their people to call their sizes something like “large, extra-large and jumbo”. It's still small, medium and large. Even if they say “call them jumbo, huge and GIGANTASAUR”, it's still small... medium... and large.
I also think that it's idiotic, and says something bad about us as a culture that our smallest size soda at most fountains is now enough soda to float a supertanker in.
If you have a really bad headache, you do NOT have a migraine unless you frequently get headaches so bad that they prevent you from functioning. You DO have a really bad headache. Take an aspirin.
If you have trouble sleeping sometimes, you do not necessarily have insomnia. You probably drink too much caffeine. Insomnia is a very specific syndrome that prevents you from getting restful sleep.
Use the language correctly, please.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
I've encountered what I consider to be some rather egregious misuses of the language lately and wanted to address them here.
If you work in food service, your smallest size is a small, okay? Regardless of WHAT your marketing department tells you to call them, you DO have a small – it is your smallest size. Years ago, marketing departments decided that “small” had negative connotations, so they started to tell their people to call their sizes something like “large, extra-large and jumbo”. It's still small, medium and large. Even if they say “call them jumbo, huge and GIGANTASAUR”, it's still small... medium... and large.
I also think that it's idiotic, and says something bad about us as a culture that our smallest size soda at most fountains is now enough soda to float a supertanker in.
If you have a really bad headache, you do NOT have a migraine unless you frequently get headaches so bad that they prevent you from functioning. You DO have a really bad headache. Take an aspirin.
If you have trouble sleeping sometimes, you do not necessarily have insomnia. You probably drink too much caffeine. Insomnia is a very specific syndrome that prevents you from getting restful sleep.
Use the language correctly, please.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Mosque Madness
Okay, there are so many facets to this particular issue, let me just tackle them one at a time.
First off, the first amendment to our Constitution guarantees religious freedom. The first LINE of the first amendment. And that includes, as our founders knew them, Mohamatans. If the owner of a private lot wants to sell or lease it to a group of Muslims for a community center and mosque, WHO CARES?
As far as “ground zero” being hallowed ground goes, that's something that SERIOUSLY needs to be evaluated in this country. It's kind of like the word “terrorism”... we don't really want to TREAT ground zero as hallowed ground, we just want to SAY that it is so that when we can use it for political ends, we can. I mean, we've now had nine years to do SOMETHING with that spot, and what we have today is what we've had for at least eight... a big fucking hole in the middle of lower Manhattan. So if it's going to be a grave, let's treat it as a grave. Let's put a big marker on the spot that no one is allowed to walk on (last time I checked it was considered bad form to walk on a grave), and leave it at that. If we're NOT going to treat it as a grave, then put up a new building there, one that people can use, with maybe a nice atrium with a small, tasteful memorial to the men and women who died there.
And exactly who is this “hallowed ground” hallowed for? Christians? I'm betting that since it was New York, there were probably about as many Jews at work in thos buildings as Christians. So is it hallowed for the Jews? What about our Atheistic and Agnostic brothers and sisters? There had to be a fair number of them working there. Hindus? This is NEW YORK, people. The very crucible of the American melting pot. You could almost name a modern religious credo at random, and I bet that there was an adherent working in WTC... including Muslims. So why not let them honor this “hallowed”, hollowed ground by putting up a community center someplace near where they can mourn their dead?
But, speaking of Muslims, let me address my Mohamatan brothers and sisters for a second here. Guys... is this really the best battle that you can choose to fight right now? I know that it's been tough for you guys. You've been prevented from building Mosques... well... pretty much everywhere in America since 9/11, and I agree that it sucks. As evidenced from the above, I'll fight for your right to put your Mosque anywhere you want. But seriously... is there no room for compromise here? You had to know that the fundamentalists were going to throw their usual fit over this. So is there no room for you to meet with these people and find out if there's an acceptable ratio for them? If there's not... then fuck 'em. But if there is, then you can avoid a huge fight and ultimate black eye over this, win or lose.
One final point. One that I would like to deliver to President Obama. Mr. President... FOCUS. You don't need to put a dog in this particular fight. It's the Skip Gates beer party thing all over again. FOCUS. There are more important things for you to spend your time on. I agree with what you said, both that the Muslims are guaranteed their right to worship when and where they want like everyone else, and that you weren't going to comment on the “wisdom” of building a Mosque there, but for God's own sweet sake. There are still a lot of leaks in our ship of state left by the previous “Captain”. I mean, let's face it... if Bush was captain of our ship of state, he was pretty much Joseph Hazelwood. Even before gays in the military (an issue that I support you on), I would work on patching some of those holes. Like Bush's decree that presidential papers be sealed IN PERPETUITY. That's some shit that happens in a third-world communist banana republic. NOT the United States of America. FIX IT! Get together with the other democrats and ram a jobs bill down the throats of the republicans. (I took that turn of phrase from the republicans when they were speaking of the health care bill – isn't it amazing how often their metaphors have homosexual overtones?) Mr. President, I voted for you because I thought that you were going to be the kind of radical politician that America needs right now, and you've let me down on that. But for God's sake, quit letting yourself get distracted by the pretty sideshows and get on the with main event, would you please?
Thanks.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
First off, the first amendment to our Constitution guarantees religious freedom. The first LINE of the first amendment. And that includes, as our founders knew them, Mohamatans. If the owner of a private lot wants to sell or lease it to a group of Muslims for a community center and mosque, WHO CARES?
As far as “ground zero” being hallowed ground goes, that's something that SERIOUSLY needs to be evaluated in this country. It's kind of like the word “terrorism”... we don't really want to TREAT ground zero as hallowed ground, we just want to SAY that it is so that when we can use it for political ends, we can. I mean, we've now had nine years to do SOMETHING with that spot, and what we have today is what we've had for at least eight... a big fucking hole in the middle of lower Manhattan. So if it's going to be a grave, let's treat it as a grave. Let's put a big marker on the spot that no one is allowed to walk on (last time I checked it was considered bad form to walk on a grave), and leave it at that. If we're NOT going to treat it as a grave, then put up a new building there, one that people can use, with maybe a nice atrium with a small, tasteful memorial to the men and women who died there.
And exactly who is this “hallowed ground” hallowed for? Christians? I'm betting that since it was New York, there were probably about as many Jews at work in thos buildings as Christians. So is it hallowed for the Jews? What about our Atheistic and Agnostic brothers and sisters? There had to be a fair number of them working there. Hindus? This is NEW YORK, people. The very crucible of the American melting pot. You could almost name a modern religious credo at random, and I bet that there was an adherent working in WTC... including Muslims. So why not let them honor this “hallowed”, hollowed ground by putting up a community center someplace near where they can mourn their dead?
But, speaking of Muslims, let me address my Mohamatan brothers and sisters for a second here. Guys... is this really the best battle that you can choose to fight right now? I know that it's been tough for you guys. You've been prevented from building Mosques... well... pretty much everywhere in America since 9/11, and I agree that it sucks. As evidenced from the above, I'll fight for your right to put your Mosque anywhere you want. But seriously... is there no room for compromise here? You had to know that the fundamentalists were going to throw their usual fit over this. So is there no room for you to meet with these people and find out if there's an acceptable ratio for them? If there's not... then fuck 'em. But if there is, then you can avoid a huge fight and ultimate black eye over this, win or lose.
One final point. One that I would like to deliver to President Obama. Mr. President... FOCUS. You don't need to put a dog in this particular fight. It's the Skip Gates beer party thing all over again. FOCUS. There are more important things for you to spend your time on. I agree with what you said, both that the Muslims are guaranteed their right to worship when and where they want like everyone else, and that you weren't going to comment on the “wisdom” of building a Mosque there, but for God's own sweet sake. There are still a lot of leaks in our ship of state left by the previous “Captain”. I mean, let's face it... if Bush was captain of our ship of state, he was pretty much Joseph Hazelwood. Even before gays in the military (an issue that I support you on), I would work on patching some of those holes. Like Bush's decree that presidential papers be sealed IN PERPETUITY. That's some shit that happens in a third-world communist banana republic. NOT the United States of America. FIX IT! Get together with the other democrats and ram a jobs bill down the throats of the republicans. (I took that turn of phrase from the republicans when they were speaking of the health care bill – isn't it amazing how often their metaphors have homosexual overtones?) Mr. President, I voted for you because I thought that you were going to be the kind of radical politician that America needs right now, and you've let me down on that. But for God's sake, quit letting yourself get distracted by the pretty sideshows and get on the with main event, would you please?
Thanks.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Let Them Go
Let me start this by defining two terms that some people use interchangably, and, I think, that average American doesn't know the difference between: debt and deficit.
The debt is how much we owe as a country. The total of the money that we've borrowed plus the interest, as well as outstanding liabilities such as medicade and medicare. Just like if you were to figure your personal debt load, you'd add the amount that you owe on your car to the amount that you owe on your house to the amount that you owe on your credit cards, etc.
The deficit, on the other hand, is the difference between what we will owe this year (our annual debt, as opposed to the total debt) minus what we'll be taking in this year, largely through taxation.
The other term that I'd like to define is Gross Domestic Product, GDP. The GDP is the total monetary value of all goods and services produced domestically by a country. It includes income earned domestically by foreigners, but does not include income earned by domestic residents on foreign ground.
The reason that I'm providing these definitions is because I'm about to talk about letting the Bush tax cuts expire, and there's a lot of bad information out there about these things.
To start with, let's see where we started.
The top tax rate... the absolute MOST that the government could take from anyone for their income was 50%. This was through the so-called “golden years” of the fifties, up until 1986. In 1986, President Reagan lowered the top tax rate from 50% to 28%, the largest tax cut in history. What was the effect of this? In 1980, our federal debt was around 900 billion. By 1990, we owed over three TRILLION, while the budget deficit remained between 3 and 5 percent of our gross domestic product. Over the next decade and a half, the top tax rate slowly rose again, but only to about 39%. In 2001, Mr. Bush reduced the top tax rate to 35%, and the capital gains tax (taxes on interest and dividends received... where most of the wealthy make most of their money) to 15%, down from about 25%. During the subsequent decade, our debt went from around 6 trillion to over 12 trillion, more than doubled in other words. At the same time, the federal deficit increased from around -2 percent of our GDP (a budget surplus) to almost 10 percent of our GDP, a twelve percent increase.
If we allow these tax cuts to expire at the end of 2010, the top income tax rate goes back up to 39%, and the capital gains tax goes to 20%. At the same time, the amended bill will allow people under $25000 per year to stay at the same tax rates.
There is a lot of rather pointless debate over how letting these tax cuts expire will effect the deficit, but the fact is that somewhere around 50% of the rise in our deficit between 2000 and 2010 was due to these tax cuts. Isn't it a funny coincidence that around 50% of our tax income comes from the richest Americans?
Look, I think that it's fair that the higher your income is, the more you pay. I pay more in taxes than someone who makes Big Macs for a living, and less than someone who manages a bank and I think that's fair.
The biggest argument FOR these tax cuts is the same as it has been since the Reagan administration: it will allow these people to reinvest that money in the United States and reduce unemployment. Good for them, good for everyone, in other words.
The problem with that argument is fairly simple to understand. Between 2000 and 2010, our unemployment rate went from about 5% to about 9%.
So it's time to let these tax cuts go. It's abvious that they haven't helped our unemployment numbers, and it would probably help to reduce the federal deficit. If my taxes have to go up 3% as part of that, I'm okay with that.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
The debt is how much we owe as a country. The total of the money that we've borrowed plus the interest, as well as outstanding liabilities such as medicade and medicare. Just like if you were to figure your personal debt load, you'd add the amount that you owe on your car to the amount that you owe on your house to the amount that you owe on your credit cards, etc.
The deficit, on the other hand, is the difference between what we will owe this year (our annual debt, as opposed to the total debt) minus what we'll be taking in this year, largely through taxation.
The other term that I'd like to define is Gross Domestic Product, GDP. The GDP is the total monetary value of all goods and services produced domestically by a country. It includes income earned domestically by foreigners, but does not include income earned by domestic residents on foreign ground.
The reason that I'm providing these definitions is because I'm about to talk about letting the Bush tax cuts expire, and there's a lot of bad information out there about these things.
To start with, let's see where we started.
The top tax rate... the absolute MOST that the government could take from anyone for their income was 50%. This was through the so-called “golden years” of the fifties, up until 1986. In 1986, President Reagan lowered the top tax rate from 50% to 28%, the largest tax cut in history. What was the effect of this? In 1980, our federal debt was around 900 billion. By 1990, we owed over three TRILLION, while the budget deficit remained between 3 and 5 percent of our gross domestic product. Over the next decade and a half, the top tax rate slowly rose again, but only to about 39%. In 2001, Mr. Bush reduced the top tax rate to 35%, and the capital gains tax (taxes on interest and dividends received... where most of the wealthy make most of their money) to 15%, down from about 25%. During the subsequent decade, our debt went from around 6 trillion to over 12 trillion, more than doubled in other words. At the same time, the federal deficit increased from around -2 percent of our GDP (a budget surplus) to almost 10 percent of our GDP, a twelve percent increase.
If we allow these tax cuts to expire at the end of 2010, the top income tax rate goes back up to 39%, and the capital gains tax goes to 20%. At the same time, the amended bill will allow people under $25000 per year to stay at the same tax rates.
There is a lot of rather pointless debate over how letting these tax cuts expire will effect the deficit, but the fact is that somewhere around 50% of the rise in our deficit between 2000 and 2010 was due to these tax cuts. Isn't it a funny coincidence that around 50% of our tax income comes from the richest Americans?
Look, I think that it's fair that the higher your income is, the more you pay. I pay more in taxes than someone who makes Big Macs for a living, and less than someone who manages a bank and I think that's fair.
The biggest argument FOR these tax cuts is the same as it has been since the Reagan administration: it will allow these people to reinvest that money in the United States and reduce unemployment. Good for them, good for everyone, in other words.
The problem with that argument is fairly simple to understand. Between 2000 and 2010, our unemployment rate went from about 5% to about 9%.
So it's time to let these tax cuts go. It's abvious that they haven't helped our unemployment numbers, and it would probably help to reduce the federal deficit. If my taxes have to go up 3% as part of that, I'm okay with that.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
"I Don't Keep Up With The News..."
It always disturbs me when I hear people say this. Partly, I think, it's because I'm a recovering news junkie, and know how depressing it can be, so can kind of understand it. Funny thing... I noticed that when I started to moderate my news watching, my suicidal tendencies went away completely.
This kind of reached a head yesterday when I was at my day job. Headline News was on in the breakroom, and they were talking about the terrible flooding in Pakistan, and none of my co-workers seemed to know that it was happening until that moment. This flooding has been going on for over a WEEK. There are 1500 known to be dead, and it is affecting millions. And they hadn't heard. This was followed by a “news story” about a girl who lost her cool at a McDonald's drive-through because she couldn't get McNuggets, and broke the window and attacked the window girl. They ALL seemed to know about this. Old news to them.
Which of these stories is the more important, you think? Personally, I think that only one of these stories BELONGED on the national news, and here's a hint as to which one... no McNuggets were involved.
I understand that the news is depressing, people, but it's important to remain INFORMED. If you don't know what the hell is going on, and you pass a group of teabaggers carrying signs about how Obama is putting our children and grandchildren in debt, you think “Oh my God, that's terrible.” But if you're informed, you realize that the vast majority of our debt problem came from the Bush administration, and that, in 2003, when Bush wanted to pass this massive package of tax cuts for the wealthy, Cheney said “Deficits don't matter.” I agree that this deficit mess is a problem, but blindly replacing one party with the other won't help... they're BOTH corrupt. But I will give you that Obama isn't doing a lot of the things that I hoped he would.
GET INFORMED, PEOPLE!
So how do you do this without watching news basically 24 hours per day, like I used to?
One way is to use the internet. Check to see what the top news stories of the moment are, and then look to see what several news sources are saying about them. And allow yourself to go out of the sphere of American, corporate-driven news. Check the BBC. Check the Swiss News Agency. Check Al Jazeera. Get a variety of viewpoints, even and ESPECIALLY those that disagree with you.
My main source for news is the PBS Newshour. There are no pretty, exciting graphics and they aren't afraid to air negative stories about their corporate underwriters. They focus on four or five big stories, and then spend about ten minutes in the middle of their show hitting other news stories.
For the sake of our country, people, get informed.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
This kind of reached a head yesterday when I was at my day job. Headline News was on in the breakroom, and they were talking about the terrible flooding in Pakistan, and none of my co-workers seemed to know that it was happening until that moment. This flooding has been going on for over a WEEK. There are 1500 known to be dead, and it is affecting millions. And they hadn't heard. This was followed by a “news story” about a girl who lost her cool at a McDonald's drive-through because she couldn't get McNuggets, and broke the window and attacked the window girl. They ALL seemed to know about this. Old news to them.
Which of these stories is the more important, you think? Personally, I think that only one of these stories BELONGED on the national news, and here's a hint as to which one... no McNuggets were involved.
I understand that the news is depressing, people, but it's important to remain INFORMED. If you don't know what the hell is going on, and you pass a group of teabaggers carrying signs about how Obama is putting our children and grandchildren in debt, you think “Oh my God, that's terrible.” But if you're informed, you realize that the vast majority of our debt problem came from the Bush administration, and that, in 2003, when Bush wanted to pass this massive package of tax cuts for the wealthy, Cheney said “Deficits don't matter.” I agree that this deficit mess is a problem, but blindly replacing one party with the other won't help... they're BOTH corrupt. But I will give you that Obama isn't doing a lot of the things that I hoped he would.
GET INFORMED, PEOPLE!
So how do you do this without watching news basically 24 hours per day, like I used to?
One way is to use the internet. Check to see what the top news stories of the moment are, and then look to see what several news sources are saying about them. And allow yourself to go out of the sphere of American, corporate-driven news. Check the BBC. Check the Swiss News Agency. Check Al Jazeera. Get a variety of viewpoints, even and ESPECIALLY those that disagree with you.
My main source for news is the PBS Newshour. There are no pretty, exciting graphics and they aren't afraid to air negative stories about their corporate underwriters. They focus on four or five big stories, and then spend about ten minutes in the middle of their show hitting other news stories.
For the sake of our country, people, get informed.
Peace.
Rev. Randal
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)