Quantcast
Channel: Pax on both houses
Viewing all 30150 articles
Browse latest View live

NPR: Economists See Nothing But "High Octane Optimism" For 2015

$
0
0
Target shoppers Kelly Foley (from left), Debbie Winslow and Ann Rich use a smartphone to look at a competitor's prices while shopping shortly after midnight on Black Friday, in South Portland, Maine.
Target shoppers Kelly Foley (from left), Debbie Winslow and Ann Rich use a smartphone to look at a competitor's prices while shopping shortly after midnight on Black Friday, in South Portland, Maine.
Each December, economists make predictions. And each new year, they get hit by unexpected events that make them look more clueless than prescient.
This year's bolt out of the blue was the plunge in oil's price, which no one saw coming.
Still, top economists' forecasts did get a lot right for 2014. One year ago, most were predicting healthy growth, tame inflation, low interest rates, rising stock prices and declining unemployment — and that's just what we got.
Now they are looking ahead, and once again, their forecasts are brimming with good cheer. These are among the most common predictions for 2015:
GDP will keep growing quickly. The gross domestic product — a measure of all U.S. goods and services — has been on a tear. The Commerce Department's latest revision shows GDP advancing at an astonishing 5 percent over July, August and September.
That growth spurt suggests the U.S. economy has momentum heading into the new year. Lower energy prices will give consumers more money to spend, and that should help boost revenues for stores, restaurants, hotels and more.
"Our assessment for growth in 2015 will now be around 3 percent," wrote Doug Handler, chief U.S. economist for IHS Global Insight. For an economy in its sixth year of expansion, a 3 percent annual pace would be impressive.
Employers will hire and pay more. In 2013, the unemployment rate averaged 7.4 percent. Last December, economists were predicting a slide to about 6.6 percent.
As it turned out, the jobless rate tumbled to 5.8 percent, and now economists see the rate dipping to 5.5 percent or lower in the coming year.
"With stronger economic growth, the U.S. will add about 230,000 jobs per month on average next year," according to the forecast of Gus Faucher, senior economist at PNC Financial Services Group. That would add up to about 2.8 million net new jobs in 2015.
Currently, the country has 2.8 million people struggling with long-term unemployment. So if Faucher's prediction were to come true, workers finally could enjoy a healthy market where job openings and willing workers would match up. And the increased demand for workers would help push up stagnant wages.
Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen makes a statement on jobs and the economic outlook Dec. 17 in Washington, D.C.
Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen makes a statement on jobs and the economic outlook Dec. 17 in Washington, D.C.
Cliff Owen/AP
Inflation will be exceptionally low. Even though the economy has been heating up, the price of energy has been cooling. The year began with crude oil selling for about $110 a barrel, and is ending with the price at about half that. Oil's plunge has driven down prices for gasoline, home heating oil, jet fuel and more.
Seeing that change, the Federal Reserve has sharply cut its forecast, saying that inflation will run between 1 percent and 1.6 percent in 2015. That's down from a September forecast of 1.6 percent to 1.9 percent.
Interest rates will inch up. OK, you've heard this before. Time and again, economists have predicted that interest rates would tick up. And time and again, they have been wrong.
For example, when this year began, the average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage was carrying an interest rate of 4.43 percent. Most economists thought that rate would rise. But as the year wound down, the 30-year rate was running at about 3.75 percent.
Nevertheless, economists think this time is different and that rates really will rise in 2015. In a mid-December statement, Fed policymakers said they "can be patient" when it comes to timing a rate increase, but most economists figure patience will run out by midyear, and that will lead to a slow, steady ratcheting up of interest rates to more normal levels.
When it comes to the strategy of holding down rates to stimulate growth, "we believe the Fed's work is now done," said Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist with The Economic Outlook Group.
Stocks will go higher. The stock market has been zooming up for years now. The Dow Jones industrial average stood at 6,627 in early March 2009, during the worst of the Great Recession. But with the recovery going strong, the stock average has been pushing above 18,000.
Some skeptics think the stock market is due for a "correction" that would knock down prices by 10 percent or more in 2015. But the more typical prediction is that with oil prices running so low, investors will want to keep putting money into companies that stand to benefit from increased consumer spending.
Howard Silverblatt, senior index analyst at S&P Dow Jones Indices, summed it up in a recent tweet, saying "high-octane optimism once again prevails on the Street."


Jim Webb's Presidential Bid: "When I Graduated, CEO Pay To Workers Was 20:1"

$
0
0

Then-Democratic Senate candidate Jim Webb speaks to 10th-grade students during an AP Government class at JEB Stuart High School on Sept. 13, 2006 in Falls Church, Va.
Among other things, former Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia has earned two Purple Hearts, one Emmy and an appointment as secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration. Pictured, Webb, then a Democratic Senate candidate, speaks to 10th-grade students during an AP government class in 2006 at J.E.B. Stuart High School in Falls Church, Va.

The Caging Of America: Why Do We Lock Up So Many People?
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/04/caging-of-america-why-do-we-lock-up-so.html

"Plutocracy Triumphant"
Cartoon Compendium

"Politics And Economics: The 101 Courses You Wish You Had"

"Taibbi: The $9 Billion Whistle Blower At JPMorgan-Chase. Financial Thuggery At The Top"


Federal Reserve Bank Investigator Carmen Segarra Fired For Holding Banks Responsible

"The Rich Aren't Just Grabbing A Bigger Slice Of The Pie. They're Taking It All"


By 
Dec. 30, 2014 |

In July, Jim Webb invited some 50 former staffers and their spouses to his northern Virginia home for a reunion that served to toast the release of his most recent book.
Over beers and between reacquainting conversations, Webb took a moment to address the gathering of campaign workers and Capitol Hill aides.
“We’re back,” uttered the former one-term Democratic senator, according to several people in the room.
At the time, most in attendance interpreted the remark as an informal recognition of Webb’s return to the public limelight after disappearing for more than a year to write “I Heard My Country Calling,” a memoir that tracks his hard-knock but admirable life growing up as a military brat. The book had just been published in May.
President Barack Obama and Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., left, wave to supporters during a rally in Virginia Beach, Va., Thursday, Sept. 27, 2012.
President Barack Obama rallies with then-Sen. Jim Webb in Virginia Beach, Va., in 2012. 
But the offhand quip resonates quite differently in hindsight, after Webb, 68, unexpectedly launched anexploratory campaign for president in November. With the simple release of an unremarkable video in the middle of the night two weeks after the midterm elections, Webb became the first well-known candidate to formally dip toes into the 2016 race. The move rattled the Washington political class, but the news was less shocking to those who know the quixotic combat Marine best.
Webb had been contemplating a White House campaign for some time, floating the idea to his small but close-knit circle of friends and confidantes more than a year ago.
“He’s been thinking about it since 2013,” says Dave “Mudcat” Saunders, a Democratic political hand in Virginia who says he chats or emails with Webb several times each week. “He thinks – deep, deep, deep, deep thinker. The guy’s regal, man. He’s a damn hero. I’m doing whatever I can to help him.”
“Life’s Clearest Calling”
To the Beltway class, Webb is primarily identified with his 2006 upset defeat of Republican Sen. George Allen, who had plans for a presidential run until that embarrassing loss at the hands of a political newcomer. But to understand Webb’s motivation in seriously contemplating the herculean task of running for president – likely against Hillary Clinton – one must recognize his immense, intrinsic sense of duty to his country.
“Service to country has always been my life’s clearest calling,” Webb wrote in his memoir.
That calling began during his time at the Naval Academy and was firmly cemented through a brutal but decorated combat tour in Vietnam, where he described being overwhelmed by “the mix of high explosives and quarts of blood.”
In July of his harrowing 1969 tour there, Webb was shelled by two grenades that left shrapnel in his skull, kidney and left knee – injuries that offered him a way out of the war.
He refused to leave the theater, ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​instead choosing to wade back into the blurry, blood-soaked battlefield, leading his battalion. He earned two Purple Hearts for his service in Vietnam.
Webb wrote:
“In a word, I felt obligated. Like my father, service to country defined my self-respect. More to the point, I loved leading infantry Marines. With a​ gritty elan, they faced the gravest dangers. They took the greatest risks. They absorbed the highest casualties. They had the fewest creature comforts. But they also stood face-to-face and toe-to-toe with the enemy, every day. And they answered in their honor to no one.” 

Given the life-or-death decisions Webb has faced, ​​a 60-percentage point polling deficit to Clinton in a hypothetical Democratic primary contest doesn’t seem particularly threatening, especially to a restless, battle-tested figure so inherently inclined to climb the leadership ladder.
Webb’s entire life has been dotted with a series of gambles against the odds, driven by a stubborn unwillingness to stay in one place too long. He’s served as secretary of the Navy, assistant secretary of defense and as a U.S. senator, also winning an Emmy Award as a journalist and even working in Hollywood. All the while, his most constant and favorite passion remained being an author, having written 10 books.
“The Webbs, it seemed, were born on the run,” he recalled of his early childhood in his memoir. ​“And there was nothing more natural than to be heading off into yet another unknown.”
Former U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., gestures during a talk at the AP Day at the Capitol in Richmond, Va., Wednesday, Dec. 3, 2014. Webb has formed an exploratory committee to look into his running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.
Former Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., seen here at the Capitol in Richmond on Dec. 3, has formed an exploratory committee for running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.
"The Smartest Bastard There" 
If Webb possesses the optimal skills of a soldier, it may explain why he is far from the prototypical politician.
When he decided in 2011 against running for a second term in the U.S. Senate, it wasn’t due to a loss of passion about the issues he championed, like criminal justice reform and repositioning America’s foreign policy. It’s that he didn’t like what he dubbed “the ornamentations of politics” that run the Senate – the perpetual backslapping, fundraising and party-saluting.
“I faced the Hobson’s choice of either turning into a perennial scold or surrendering a part of my individuality to the uncontrollable, collective nature of group politics. I was not ready to do either,” he explained of his decision in his most recent book.
“It was a real struggle of the conscience for him,” says a former policy aide to Webb who now works for another senator. “The demands of the party and being part of a larger organization, it’s just not his natural personality. He thinks of himself foremost as a writer. Writing is a solitary effort. It’s not something you do with other people.”
The relevant question now is whether Webb’s insular, surly personality is suited for the frenetic, media-driven circus of a national campaign or the office of the presidency itself, especially following the tenure of President Barack Obama, whose legislative initiatives have been hamstrung by his own reclusive nature.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
Since his exploratory launch Nov. 19, Webb has appeared only once before the media in Richmond, Virginia, and hasn’t traveled to an early primary state.​ His private outreach to potential supporters is mostly being steered by himself and a couple of trusted aides from his Senate tenure. He has not been in personal touch with the state party head in any of the three early nominating states. A spokeswoman told U.S. News he was not available for an interview for this story.
There’s no draft movement, no formal structure, no kitchen-cabinet plotting strategy and parsing of daily decisions. It’s the Jim Webb show – which is something it can’t remain if it’s going to morph into something bigger.
“Webb is not the type to rely on anyone except himself for counsel,” says someone who worked with him before his Senate run. “He’s never been in a room in which he wasn’t sure he was the smartest bastard there.”
Sen. George Allen, R-Va., rides a horse during the Labor Day parade in Buena Vista, Va., on Sept. 4, 2006, while campaigning for re-election.
Webb unseated incumbent Republican Sen. George Allen of Virginia, seen here during a Labor Day parade in Buena Vista, Va., in the 2006 elections. 
Appeal in Appalachia?
“And all I have asked, as the ancient philosopher intoned, is not to be understood too quickly,” Webb writes in his latest book, and his application of that dictum to himself seems apt, given the varied interpretations of his political ideology.
Some point to his vehement opposition to the Iraq War and see him as a liberal.
Others note his service in President Ronald Reagan’s administration and his support of gun rights, and view him as a moderate.
His push for criminal justice reform in the Senate aligns him with libertarians like Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.
Yet his rhetoric on the economic stratification that’s roiling the country makes him sound like a populist in the vein of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.
The fact that it’s so difficult to pigeonhole Webb’s political package could turn out to be a great strength or a severe liability, depending on his ability to manage his image. 
He describes himself as a Jacksonian Democrat who connects with a middle class increasingly confronted by an economic system they see as imbalanced toward the wealthy.
“His constituency is people who feel like they’re getting screwed,” Saunders says.
In his 2007 Democratic response to President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address, he spoke extensively about how soaring stock market prices and corporate profits weren’t being fairly shared with the masses.
“When I graduated from college, the average corporate CEO made 20 times what the average worker did. Today, it’s nearly 400 times,” he said at the time, a refrain he reprised in September at the National Press Club.
In the Senate, Webb fought to pass a windfall profits tax on the banks that benefited from the financial sector bailouts of 2008 and 2009, but lamented at that same September event that his party had a hand in blocking its passage.
“When we got it to the Senate floor, it really was the Democrats who didn’t want to vote on it, not the Republicans,” he said.
But while Warren’s economic message strikes a chord with liberal elites on the coasts and in urban enclaves, Webb’s potential support lies in largely rural and industrial white America – ironically the same constituency that revived Clinton’s flagging 2008 presidential primary bid against Barack Obama.
A graphic reading: "His constituency is people who feel like they're getting screwed," by Dave “Mudcat” Saunders, a Democratic political strategist.
“He’s an enigma to a lot of people,” says one of Webb’s former Senate aides. “A lot of people write him off as a centrist or a moderate, and I actually don’t think that’s a fair way to describe him at all. He’s an economic populist. I think his roots and family roots are very much in the Democratic Party. But it’s not inner-city, racial Democratic politics. It’s very rural, poor Democratic politics.”
The left is pining for Warren to make a populist economic argument against a Clinton candidacy, but it’s Webb who may be the more likely vehicle for that message.
“Economic inequality – I don’t believe that issue will be thoroughly vetted with Hillary leading the ticket,” says Nelson Jones, a law school classmate of Webb's who has remained a friend for 40 years.
The Contrast With Hillary
Since Webb made rumblings about his intentions in the fall, the media has been waiting for him to take a shot at Clinton. He has repeatedly and carefully refused to take the bait.
But during an under-the-radar August interview on Iowa public television that was hardly noticed in the heat of the midterm campaigns, Webb did offer some hints of how exactly he would position himself against the presumed Democratic front-runner.
“Jim’s to the left of her on foreign policy. He’s adamant about when there’s a use of force. We shouldn’t be occupying foreign territory,” Jones says.
While Clinton supported intervening in Libya’s civil war and backed a plan to arm moderate rebels in Syria’s strife, Webb found both of those positions to be ill-advised, counterproductive and against historical U.S. precedent.
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Jim Webb (R) speaks to the media as Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) (L) looks on prior to the Women for Webb fund raising event October 3, 2006 in Old Town Alexandria, Virginia. During the event Clinton officially endorsed Webb for Virginia's Senate race.
Webb speaks to the media before an event at which then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, left, endorsed him in the 2006 Virginia Senate race. 
“If you look at the Middle East, I don’t think that this policy has been very good and Secretary Clinton, quite frankly, was a part of annunciating this strategy,” Webb said in that August interview.
While they aren’t acknowledging Webb publicly, Clinton loyalists are keeping an eye on him privately. The week before Thanksgiving, staffers of Philippe Reines, Clinton’s longtime communications guru, pitched talk radio producers on the racy, sexually charged writings in Webb’s novels, according to a source. Webb was forced to fend off a similar attack in 2006, when Allen accused him of “demeaning women.”
Webb also has previously apologized for writing that a Naval Academy dorm was a “horny woman’s dream" in a 1979 Washingtonian magazine piece titled "Jim Webb: Women Can't Fight."
The piece's central argument was against allowing women to take combat positions in the military. If Webb were to ever attain traction, Clinton's allies would certainly lob the rhetoric back at him. 
But he isn’t obsessing over Clinton, Saunders says.
“Jim Webb and I haven’t talked about Hillary five minutes, and I’ve talked to him a lot,” he says. “I’m not sure she’s going to run. She ain’t signed up yet. Some people in the party are not ready for Hillary.”
Not even Webb’s friends know if he’ll ultimately turn the ignition switch on a campaign. Raising money and even hiring top staff will be tremendously challenging in an environment in which Democrats are waiting for Clinton to decide. Fusing a coalition with the anti-war left and blue-collar white voters who are inherently more culturally conservative could prove too tricky a feat. And there’s ample reason to doubt Webb will be willing to stomach the political trade-offs so often required of modern candidates if they want to win.
When Webb was thinking about running against Allen in 2006, Jones advised him against it, telling him a joke about how waging an uphill political campaign is like dancing with a bear.
“You start dancing with the bear, you can’t sit down until you get tired. You gotta keep dancing with the bear until it gets tired,” Jones recalls. “Even if you get tired, you’ve got to keep at it, dancing.”
In that instance, of course, Webb ignored his friend’s advice.
But this time, Jones says, “I told him, ‘This is a much bigger bear.’”

First Potential Democratic Challenger To Hillary Clinton Forms Exploratory Committee
Daily Caller


Obamacare Is Reducing Healthcare Costs

$
0
0
"Obamacare: Where's The Train Wreck?"
Obamacare is reducing costs. Around the country, doctors are finding ways of reducing spending while improving patients' health. Look at Medicare spending, which has decreased even though it's not affected by the business cycle. Project Syndicate

Alan: Republican opposition to the manifest benefits of  Obamacare is the most reprehensible manifestation of unhinged political villainy in recent domestic politics.


Conservative Norm Ornstein: The Media Ignore Republican Lunacy

"Let's Just Say It. The Republicans Are The Problem"
Conservative Norm Ornstein and Liberal Thomas Mann

"Just How Far Out Is The Republican Fringe?" Norm Ornstein (And Is It The Fringe?)

"It's Even Worse Than It Looks"
Conservaive Norm Ornstein and Liberal Thomas Mann

"When Extremism Goes Mainstream"
Conservative Norm Ornstein

"The Real Death Panels," Conservative Norm Ornstein

The Psychiatric Diagnosis Of American Conservatives: Folie a Plusieurs 

"American Conservatives And Oppositional-Defiant Disorder"

"Are Republicans Insane?"

"The Republican Party Is A Satanic Cult"

Jindal Criticizes The Stupid Party: "Simply protects the rich so they get to keep their toys"

"The Reign of Morons Is Here," Charles P. Pierce, The Atlantic

"A Southerner Explains Tea Party Radicalism: The Civil War Is Not Over"

"People Who Watch Only Fox News 
Know Less Than People Who Watch No News"

Bill Maher: The Zombie Life Cycle Of Republican Lies. They Never - Ever - Die

"Bank On It: The South Is Always Wrong"

"Why The Bible Belt Is Its Own Worst Enemy"
  1. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/10/why-bible-belt-is-christianitys-enemy.html
  2. "Republicans For Revolution," A Study In Anarchic Apocalypticism

The Guardian: John Olivers' Viral Video Is The Best Climate Debate You'll Ever See

Stewart, Colbert, Oliver Probe The Spectacular Idiocy Of Climate Change Deniers

    George McGovern: "The Case For Liberalism, A Defense Of The Future Against The Past"



    Disrespectful New York Police Are Losing The Public's Respect

    $
    0
    0
    New York police are losing the public's respect. Officers should not have turned their backs on the mayor when he gave a eulogy at a funeral on Saturday. "They have taken the most grave and solemn of civic moments — a funeral of a fallen colleague — and hijacked it for their own petty look-at-us gesture." The New York Times


    The Last Time A Democrat Won A Majority Of "The White Vote" Was 1964

    $
    0
    0
    Signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    "We have lost the South for a generation"

    ***

    Clinton can win without the white vote. It's not clear how any Democrat could win over white working-class voters,who are mostly Republicans, nor do Democrats really need to. "The last time a Democratic presidential candidate won a majority of the white vote was 1964. Yet they’ve managed to win five elections since then." The Washington Post



    Police Lethality: Unarmed Mentally Ill Black Man Shot In Back At "Very Close Range"

    $
    0
    0
    Ezell Ford was shot in the back. The mentally ill black man, killed by Los Angeles police in August, suffered three gunshot wounds, an autopsy showed. One was to his back and included the imprint of a muzzle, indicating he was shot at "very close range." Kate Mather, Richard Winton and Ruben Vives in the Los Angeles Times.

    Republican Majority Whip Steve Scalise Spoke At White Supremacist Conference. The majority whip in the House spoke at a conference of white supremacists in 2002. Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) gave a presentation at a conference hosted by the notorious David Duke, a former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. "Scalise's political circle worked furiously late Monday to quell the storm... describing him as a disorganized and ill-prepared young politician who didn't pay close attention to invitations." Robert Costa and Ed O'Keefe in The Washington Post.


    "Rome Has Spoken: A Guide To Forgotten Papal Statements" And How Teaching Has Changed

    "Why The Catholic Church Must Change: A Necessary Conversation"

    $
    0
    0
    "Why The Catholic Church Must Change" 
    is freely available online at:


    Ernie
    "Why The Catholic Church Must Change" explains the contextual approach to understanding the bible and its ramifications on major issues ensnarling the RomanCatholic Church. Although the church has embraced a contextual reading, so many of its policies are grounded in tradition and literal readings of select lines from the bible. Of course Genesis is not a literal description of our origins. Our understanding of physics, biology and common sense make that clear. However, the meanings from the Genesis story are much richer than one might draw from a description of Adam, Eve and a talking snake. To its credit, the Roman Catholic Church acknowledges that. However on other issues, especially women clergy, homosexuality and contraception, the church has blinders and hails to a narrow literal interpretation of sentences lifted out of context to justify narrow, human prejudices. --- The description of the issues are masterful.

    The author does have a small chip on her shoulder owing to past employment grievences, and she is forthcoming about that. In this case, her experiences illustrate the clericalism of the church and its insistence on obedience above all else. Unfortunately, in the small fiefdoms that make up the Catholic Churchthe quality of teaching and leadership is entirely dependent upon a few ordained men.

    This was an interesting read after Gary Wills book, "Why Priests". While Wills' book was very academic difficult for me to follow... not to say boring in parts due to exceedingly academic discussions of what appeared minutia to me.. this one was very readable and engaging. Logic, good will and inspiration characterized the elaborations of thearguments and discussion.

    The major premise was that the thinking of the church should be in motion. The teaching of core issues is different today than it was 300, 500 and 1200 years ago because of our growth. The Church should be even better 100, 300 and 800 years from now.

    Finally, I have wondered why Catholics have been faithful to a church that has so often rejected them. The Magisterium’s understanding and teachings about women and homosexuals, for example, are ignorant and sad, to say the least. But I sense that Wills, Ralph and others of their ilk recognize that all institutions will be imperfect. They are taking the long view, anticipating the church as it will be in 100 years. ... 


    "The Thinking Housewife," Contraception And "Why The Church Must Change"

    $
    0
    0
    Dear Fred,

    Thanks for your email.

    Like many American "conservatives,""Thinking Housewife" Laura Wood has little interest in discussing the muck of political practicality, much less compromising about it.  http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2013/08/more-on-the-consequences-of-contraception/

    Instead, Laura adheres to "Pure Principles" which Christian conservatives consider not only salvific but The Only path to salvation. 


    Conservatives look straight at the sun and are blinded by the light. They are seduced by beliefs too true to be good. 

    In the late '60s when we were at the University of Toronto, I read a zoological study done in a Michigan wilderness area.  The research examined the sudden disappearance of wolves from an island ecosystem. As soon as the wolves were gone, the deer population soared. Within three generations, their surging numbers surpassed the land's "carrying capacity." Then, unexpectedly, the population not only fell but plummeted by two thirds.

    Since contemporary "conservatives" have difficulty conceiving human beings as co-creators of The Incarnation, Laura avoids discussion of biological necessity and therelationship between necessity and human stewardship. (A parenthetical prediction: Pope Francis will address environmental degradation and its anthropogenic causes. Consistent with his namesake, Francis will remind humankind of its indispensable responsibilities to Earth, both personal and political. While mentioning Francis, it also bears mention that Pope Benedict used the phrase "co-creator" to describe the proper role of human beings. See "Pope Francis: Truth Is A Relationship, Not An Abstract Absolute" http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/09/pope-francis-truth-is-relationship-not.html) 

    Were he alive today, Gilbert Keith Chesterton would describe conservatives' aggressive ignorance concerning collective, political responsibility as being "plain as potatoes." GKC's intellectual rigor would also persuade him that humankind is either at, or near, Earth's carrying capacity. (Chesterton and his wife - who were happily married - had no children.") http://alanarchibald.homestead.com/ChestertonQuotes.html

    Notably (yet rarely noted) is this curious circumstance: We humans have, in fact, fulfilled a biblical command and are now in complete compliance with Yahweh's enjoinder to "multiply and fill the earth." 

    It seems Laura would rather "let God do the dirty work" by making no attempt to prevent humankind from outstripping earth's carrying capacity, thus insuring a kind of calamity that would make God alone responsible for the "sudden" death of billions. "It was God's will, you see..." (Christ's essential command is just too onerous. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/02/love-your-enemies-do-good-to-those-who.html  ///  http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/08/yeshua-excoriates-fellow-pharisees-woe.html) 

    Two weeks ago at Chautauqua Institution, Director of Religion, Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, offered this prayer: "Dear God, we pray for peace as if it is your responsibility and not our obligation."

    I agree with Laura that contraception -- to the exclusion of child bearing -- can be a significant deprivation of goodness. But we are not talking about "no children" nor the"elimination of consumers." Neither of these outcomes looms. Some distant day we may devise a "steady-state" economy, and in the distant future we might even see something like steady-state population. But for those with eyes to see, the demographic sky is not falling.  http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/07/conservatives-scare-more-easily-than.html

    Concerning demographic growth and Vatican doctrine, I note that the Church does not prohibit marriage between sterile individuals. In the absence of procreative capability,why does the isolated "unitive" function of sterile couples not corrupt their relationship if, as the church currently teaches, unitive and procreative functions must be joined? (Earlier this year, Margaret Nutting Ralph of Lexington Theological Seminary and St. Meinrad Seminary, published a remarkably even-handed and richly-documented book, "Why The Catholic Church Must Change: A Necessary Conversation." Her chapter, "Contraception," is exemplary. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17396717-why-the-catholic-church-must-change)

    The Church's insistence on celibate priests and nuns also demonstrates that not everyone need reproduce. Indeed, the Church would welcome magnitudes more nuns-and-priests to help fill their dwindled ranks. 

    Historical Note: "By the 4th century, marriages of nuns were condemned as "more sinful than adultery." The Church also discouraged the marriage of priests but this was not enforced until after the First General Council of the Lateran in 1123. On the other hand, by the 5th century the role of a nun was that of a religious woman who took a vow of chastity and whose duties might include serving in hospitals, giving to the poor, and praying for others..." "Religious Nuns In Medieval Europe" - http://www.clioproject.org/files/PDF/Medieval_Nuns_Lesson.pdf  It deserves mention that polygamy persisted into the early Christian era and that marriage was not made a sacrament until 1184 A.D. at the Council of Verona. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_(Catholic_Church)) 

    It has even been argued - with some validity I think - that clerical celibacy has removed "Christian genes" from "the pool" and that Vatican insistence on celibacy has delayed The Coming Of The Kingdom. 

    Rome's fondness for celibacy dates back to the universal expectation among first century Christians that Christ would return "tomorrow... or next week" -- in any event, "really soon!!!" -- thus obviating need for the sullying sex act. See "Why Church Fathers Were So Negative About Sex" - http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/03/why-church-fathers-were-so-negative.html  Note that the universal conviction of early Christians that parousia was "just around the corner" was the first time, but not the last, thatthe church "got it wrong.")

    With the passage of time, human sexuality re-asserted itself and lay people replaced their former belief in imminent parousia with a sensus fidelium eager for connubial bliss. (It is neither accidental nor coincidental that most Christian utterances of God's sacred name take place during love-making which, thanks be to God, gives ready access to near-mystical reverie. "Deus meus!")

    Why do History and Science (including the scientific study of sex) have so little resonance with so many Christians? 

    Consider the following history and its categorical rejection by American conservatives, not because it is untrue but because acceptance would be ideologically catastrophic.  http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/09/george-will-documents-ronald-reagans.html

    Often, conservative Christians condemn scientific findings, a case in point being the reality of homosexual activity across the animal kingdom. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior  

    I myself was once "humped" by a male Rottweiler, demonstrating - in unforgettable fashion - that homosexuality also plays out between species.  

    Similarly, conservative Christians disdain the findings of modern psychology. 

    Admittedly, there is much nonsense in this "discipline," but certain phenomena -- "projection psychology" and "the psychological shadow" -- are not only well-documented and readily observable, but foundational to human experience and human history.

    Although most of us ignore "the shadow" and its "projection," interpersonal and political relationships are routinely ravaged by these interactive "reflexes."

    Laura's disparagement of Lauren Sandler illustrates this "point." (I wonder... Has Laura ever hosted a discussion of the contraceptive behaviors of her audience? Or would such openness run the risk of revealing discrepancy between "the ideal" and "the real?")

    The glibbest way to justify self-righteousness is to spotlight other people's "shadows" and, in the process, avoid one's own. 

    Here's the rub...

    Since "The Shadow" is always present, it can always be found. 

    Typically, relationships fall apart when self-righteous people focus exclusively on the shadow of others. 

    When spousal relationships fail, it is almost always due to the denial of one's personal shadow and disproportionate displacement of that shadow onto one's mate. 

    This same mechanism operates in the psyches of Christian conservatives when they disparage Islam and Islamics even though offensive Muslims are largely indistinguishable from Inquisitorial Catholics just 500 years ago, not to mention the witch's brew of Christian fundamentalism eager to impose theocratic norms on "democratic" process.  http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/08/if-you-impose-your-rules-for-getting.html

    The insidious projection of one's own "shadow" onto "evil others" arises from the intractable fact that The Shadow REALLY exists.

    Since human nature is compounded of good and evil, anyone can identify the existence of actual, factual evil in anyone else... in any society... in any human institution. 

    Just consider the evil embedded in Barack HUSSEIN Obama. 

    When we focus exclusively on "the other's" shadow, not only can "the other" be "damned," but damnation can be proven with real justification! 

    Against this backdrop, it is a great boon that Yeshua's teaching focuses disproportionately on recognition and re-appropriation of one's personal shadow. The Nazarene is pellucidly clear that humankind's underlying spiritual disease is homo sapiens' ferocious determination to "see the speck in another's eye when there is an entire tree trunk in our own." 

    In this regard, Yeshua's "Woe Passages" may be the most memorable teaching - but most infrequently sermonized - in his entire ministry.

    One can, of course, read any widely-revered translation of Matthew's "Woe Passages." 

    Here, for example, is how Jesus excoriates the Pharisees in the New International Version - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+23&version=NIV

    Increasingly, however, I prefer "The Message," a translation whose wording, while substantively true to the original Greek and Hebrew texts, jolts me beyond "chestnut" complacency.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Message_(Bible)

    Matthew 23

    The Message (MSG)

    Religious Fashion Shows

    23 1-3 Now Jesus turned to address his disciples, along with the crowd that had gathered with them. “The religion scholars and Pharisees are competent teachers in God’s Law. You won’t go wrong in following their teachings on Moses. But be careful about following them. They talk a good line, but they don’t live it. They don’t take it into their hearts and live it out in their behavior. It’s all spit-and-polish veneer.
    4-7 “Instead of giving you God’s Law as food and drink by which you can banquet on God, they package it in bundles of rules, loading you down like pack animals. They seem to take pleasure in watching you stagger under these loads, and wouldn’t think of lifting a finger to help. Their lives are perpetual fashion shows, embroidered prayer shawls one day and flowery prayers the next. They love to sit at the head table at church dinners, basking in the most prominent positions, preening in the radiance of public flattery, receiving honorary degrees, and getting called ‘Doctor’ and ‘Reverend.’
    8-10 “Don’t let people do that to you, put you on a pedestal like that. You all have a single Teacher, and you are all classmates. Don’t set people up as experts over your life, letting them tell you what to do. Save that authority for God; let him tell you what to do. No one else should carry the title of ‘Father’; you have only one Father, and he’s in heaven. And don’t let people maneuver you into taking charge of them. There is only one Life-Leader for you and them—Christ.
    11-12 “Do you want to stand out? Then step down. Be a servant. If you puff yourself up, you’ll get the wind knocked out of you. But if you’re content to simply be yourself, your life will count for plenty.

    Frauds!

    13 “I’ve had it with you! You’re hopeless, you religion scholars, you Pharisees! Frauds! Your lives are roadblocks to God’s kingdom. You refuse to enter, and won’t let anyone else in either.
    15 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You go halfway around the world to make a convert, but once you get him you make him into a replica of yourselves, double-damned.
    16-22 “You’re hopeless! What arrogant stupidity! You say, ‘If someone makes a promise with his fingers crossed, that’s nothing; but if he swears with his hand on the Bible, that’s serious.’ What ignorance! Does the leather on the Bible carry more weight than the skin on your hands? And what about this piece of trivia: ‘If you shake hands on a promise, that’s nothing; but if you raise your hand that God is your witness, that’s serious’? What ridiculous hairsplitting! What difference does it make whether you shake hands or raise hands? A promise is a promise. What difference does it make if you make your promise inside or outside a house of worship? A promise is a promise. God is present, watching and holding you to account regardless.
    23-24 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You keep meticulous account books, tithing on every nickel and dime you get, but on the meat of God’s Law, things like fairness and compassion and commitment—the absolute basics!—you carelessly take it or leave it. Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required. Do you have any idea how silly you look, writing a life story that’s wrong from start to finish, nitpicking over commas and semicolons?
    25-26 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You burnish the surface of your cups and bowls so they sparkle in the sun, while the insides are maggoty with your greed and gluttony. Stupid Pharisee! Scour the insides, and then the gleaming surface will mean something.
    27-28 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You’re like manicured grave plots, grass clipped and the flowers bright, but six feet down it’s all rotting bones and worm-eaten flesh. People look at you and think you’re saints, but beneath the skin you’re total frauds.
    29-32 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You build granite tombs for your prophets and marble monuments for your saints. And you say that if you had lived in the days of your ancestors, no blood would have been on your hands. You protest too much! You’re cut from the same cloth as those murderers, and daily add to the death count.
    33-34 “Snakes! Reptilian sneaks! Do you think you can worm your way out of this? Never have to pay the piper? It’s on account of people like you that I send prophets and wise guides and scholars generation after generation—and generation after generation you treat them like dirt, greeting them with lynch mobs, hounding them with abuse.
    35-36 “You can’t squirm out of this: Every drop of righteous blood ever spilled on this earth, beginning with the blood of that good man Abel right down to the blood of Zechariah, Barachiah’s son, whom you murdered at his prayers, is on your head. All this, I’m telling you, is coming down on you, on your generation.
    37-39 “Jerusalem! Jerusalem! Murderer of prophets! Killer of the ones who brought you God’s news! How often I’ve ached to embrace your children, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you wouldn’t let me. And now you’re so desolate, nothing but a ghost town. What is there left to say? Only this: I’m out of here soon. The next time you see me you’ll say, ‘Oh, God has blessed him! He’s come, bringing God’s rule!’” 
    *** 
    Make no mistake. Pharisaism thrives in every generation and can not be isolated nor anachronized by the persistent conservative urge to project the living shadow of Pharisaism onto the distant past. 

    The smarmy logic of self-righteous Christians goes like this: "Pharisees were hypocritical Jews who lived in antiquity. We are good Christian people who live in the 21st century A.D." http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/04/americans-especially-catholics-approve.html

    Pax tecum

    Alan
    ***

    Pope Francis: "Truth Is A Relationship" Not An Abstract Absolute


    ***


    ***

    On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Fred Owens <froghospital911@gmail.com> wrote:

    Notably (yet rarely noted) is this curious circumstance: We humans have actually fulfilled a biblical command and are now in full compliance with Yahweh's command to "multiply and fill the earth."

    The only biblical command we have fulfilled  --

    There is limited value in purely theoretical discussions, as you point out, especially when it comes to children. Children are incredibly messy and they poop on theories and make scribbles out of your most careful plans

    When it comes to having children, how many is always a wrong question. Have as many as you want.

    Think of a party, a room full of people, everyone having a good time -- who would bother to count how many people are in the room? Introduce disharmony and the room is instantly over-crowded

    The goal is harmony. To fear or even consider over-population or under-population is more than a waste of time, it is actually a harm. Such thinking about numbers impairs the judgment of young people who are about to become (or not become) parents. 
    ***
    Dear Fred,

    Thanks for your email.

    I agree. 

    People should have as many children as they want -- within the context of continuing education so they can understand the social and economic implications of having children. 

    Here's the rub.

    In the absence of contraception -- which I think "The Thinking Housewife" would ban if she could -- people almost never have the number of children they want but end up with the number that haphazardly come their way.

    Assuming that people have ready access to contraception - and that ongoing education is a given - I do not fear global overpopulation.

    In my lifetime, Mexican women have gone from an average of nearly 7 children to slightly over 2.

    In Turkey, Prime Minister Erdogan is raising hackles by insisting that Turkish women demonstrate their patriotism by having 3 children rather than the current norm of "2." 

    In fact, while studying Turkey at Chautauqua Institution two weeks ago, I learned that Turkish workers are spontaneously returning from Germany and that the Turkish government is pondering incentives to bring even more home. Turkish industry is booming like very few places on earth with an annualized growth rate of nearly 7% since the early 2000s.)

    I also agree about the importance of harmony: like you say, inducing fear over global over-population or under-population is not helpful. 

    Significantly, Mexican and Turkish women did not decide under master plan aegis to collapse the number of children they're having.

    Rather, these women became aware - in the context of their lives - that contraception was a possibility and that fewer children enabled their families to enjoy more educational opportunity, better-and-more-abundant food, improved housing, more income and better healthcare.

    This knowledge, coupled with ready availability of contraception, has been enough to make national reproductive rates "steady-state sustainable" over the last 30-40 years. 

    Prohibition of contraception (including shame- and guilt-prohibited contraception) will swell populations in relatively uneducated nations until countries like Haiti exceed their territorial "carrying capacity" and "the whole shebang" goes bust.


    Please consider an attempt to persuade Laura to encourage her correspondents (and herself) to speak (albeit anonymously) about their own use (or non-use) of artificial contraceptives. I suspect her correspondents do not deviate much from the frequently cited statistic that more than 90% of Catholic women use artificial contraception at some time in their reproductive lives. 

    Ah! How easily we fault youthful passion (once it's behind us)! (Enter Augustine... who, brilliantly, went on to say, "Love and do what you will.")

    If nothing else, it would be good if Laura prompted her correspondents to consciously confront their "contraceptive status" in a "social setting" -- rather than sweeping it under their "mental rugs." A tonic effect will obtain even if members of her "circle" decline to state their views.

    Pax tecum

    Alan 
    ***
    FRED OWENS writes:
    Here is a look at the future for aging boomers. The cause of this problem is arguable, and possible solutions are worth discussing. But the numbers themselves are facts. We did not have enough children to give each one of us a nursemaid and blame who you will, the fact itself is rather stubborn.
    It might be worthwhile to urge younger people in their child-bearing years to take heed.
    But even so, we aging boomers will have to care for each other, one ancient cripple aiding another, and suffer through it.
    Laura writes:
    The cause is contraception and the widespread approval of it. America has danced the night away and the hangover has just begun.
    Here is an interesting figure from the LA Times:
    The ratio of potential caregivers to boomers needing care will sink from 7.2 to 1 in 2010 to 2.9 to 1 by 2050, according to the study.
    Hello, Lauren Sandler. Where are you? Oh, here she is, on her couch, representing the joys of sterility.
    LaurenPortraitshorter72dpi2
    The economy will also be stagnant in the years ahead because of the aging of the baby boomers, who will be consuming less. Economies rely on consumers. When there are fewer consumers, there are fewer robust businesses. That’s not to say that people should have children to serve as economic widgets, but simply that when people don’t have children, a culture necessarily declines and then dissolves, even though some, such as Ms. Sandler, are very, very happy.

    Laura, 
    A consequence of widespread contraception is fewer children to eventually serve as caregivers for the aged. I agree this is true, but my question is "What do we do now?" 
    Here's an analogy: when the waters are rising we can debate what caused the flood, but it would be more useful to start filling sandbags.
    We will soon have a large cohort of aged baby boomers and a shortage of caregivers. Christian compassion compels us to do our best. I will soon be a member of this cohort, having been born in 1946. My intention is to care for others of my own age as much as I am able for as long as I am able. But there is no guarantee, not from gov't. and actually not from family either, that others will be able or willing to care for me when I need it.
    My grandparents and great-grandparents had large families. My two maternal aunts and my two maternal great-aunts never married. They stayed home and took care of their parents and lived as spinsters (which should be an honorable title).
    Social security was instituted to fill in some gaps because family members do not always show up with a dutiful response. You might argue that this gov't program encourages irresponsibility, but still, under any regime, we will have people who fall through the gaps with no one to care for them.
    With aging baby boomers who had few or no children -- we can see this coming. There can be no pleasure in saying I told you so.
    I'm not going to worry about this too much. We're all in God's hands. There's people dying in Syria today and they have it much worse than we do. 
    Fred




    On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Fred Owens <froghospital911@gmail.com> wrote:
    Dear Laura,

    Aging boomers  -- The cause of this problem is arguable, and possible solutions are worth discussing. But the numbers themselves are facts. We did not have enough children to give each one of us a nursemaid and blame who you will, the fact itself is rather stubborn.

    It might be worthwhile to urge younger people in their child-bearing years to take heed.
    But even so, we aging boomers will have to care for each other, one ancient cripple aiding another, and suffer through it.
    --
    Fred Owens
    cell: 360-739-0214

    My blog is Fred Owens

    send mail to:

    Fred Owens
    35 West Main St Suite B #391
    Ventura CA 93001
    *** 

    8.3771345138@web126106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
    For conservative Christians, nearly perfect is not good enough. Only perfection will do.
    Burdened by the perversions of "perfection" (whose biblical referent is better translated as "completeness") Christianity's "heavenly carrot" and "hellish stick" have come to recall The Logic of Terrorism.

    In effect, Christianity's threat/reward system represents God as a terrorist who, at "The Last Judgment," will resort to the tactics of never-ending torture. 

    Even if it is true that we "condemn ourselves," would not a merciful God have created a Universe in which "moral failures" simply pass out of Existence? In Judaism -- and, lest we forget, Jesus was a practicing Jew -- the post-mortem punishments of Gehenna/Sheol never last more than a year.  http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/08/in-jewish-thought-punishments-of-after.html


    To escape the terror -- to escape the terrible threat of eternal torture -- most Christians will do anything. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/04/americans-especially-catholics-approve.html

    Hence, Blaise Pascal's observation: "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction."

    Addressing the Mountain Meadow Massacre, Mormon historian Sandra Tanner (?) observed: "When you are certain you’re doing the will of God, you will do anything." 
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf4W3QeVN-s 
    http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/10/mormonism-is-not-christian-founding.html 
    http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/01/mormons-pbs-frontline-documentary.html 

    We have come to assume that Grand Inquisitor, Tomas de Torquemada must have been a bad man who knew he was doing bad things. In fact, Torquemada believed he was acting out of high virtue, nurturing the summum bonum, enacting The Will of God.

    See: "Americans, Especially Catholics, Approve Of torture," National Catholic Reporter


    See: "Trial By Ordeal: A Thriving Practice Into The 17th Century"

    http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/09/trial-by-ordeal-alive-and-well-in-17th.html 

    In the presence of palpably good people, we never sense that they are fleeing the clutches of Satan or trying to avoid torment. 
    Rather, the lives of palpably good people bubble forth from divine embrace.
    Humans cannot contemplate an Eternal Lake of Fire without such intense self-absorption that we cringe in armored postures of self-defense.
    It is impossible to dedicate oneself to others' agape wellbeing when crimped and stunted by fear.


    In John's First Epistle, we are told "There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." (Where are biblical literalists when we need them?)

    "If your heart is full of fear, you will not seek truth; you will seek security. But a heart is full of love has a limbering effect on the mind." Rev. William Sloane Coffin paraphrase

    St. Augustine: "Love, and do what you will."

    Dorothy Day: "I really only love God as much as I love the person I love the least.”

    Tom Weston S.J.: “You can safely assume that you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” 

    To make one's own agency co-terminous with God’s Will -- with no understanding of irony or paradox -- is not to do God's Will but to create a “cover” for working one's own will without shame, guilt or second-guessing. 

    Ursula LeGuin observed that “There are no right answers to wrong questions.”  

    And because there are no right answers to wrong questions, the wrong question "Will I be saved?" does not have a right answer.

    If you live right, if you love even your enemies, the question of "salvation" doesn't even come up because your present experience of salvation obviates any need for fear-driven questions.

    Do not work on salvation - at least not directly.


    Instead, work on the enactment of love.

    As soon as human beings saddle themselves with essentially terrorizing questions like "Will I be saved?" or "Will I burn for all time, and beyond time, in a lake of unquenchable fire?" we disable our capacity for disinterested love, love which gives itself for love's sake. 
    Lacking the straightforward engagement of loving others as our daily bread, "the left hand always knows what the right hand is doing" and we are grievously injured by the resulting calculations. 
    We become "calculating" people.

    ***

    "If You Impose Your Rules For Getting Into Heaven, Know That I Will Tell You To Go To Hell"
    (The imposition of one's theological will and complacent self-satisfaction with preaching to the choir.)

    The 31 Mile Long Papal Library: An Excerpt From 60 Minutes "Inside The Vatican"

    Aristotle: The Greek Understanding Of Democracy's Essence

    New House Majority Whip Calls For Clear Labeling Of White Supremacists

    $
    0
    0

    WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) said on Tuesday that he would introduce a new bill requiring clearer labeling of white supremacists.
    The White Supremacist Labeling Act of 2015 would require white supremacists to wear 4-inch-by-6-inch name tags clearly designating them as members of an official hate group.

    “Right now, it’s impossible to tell the difference between neo-Nazis and collectors of WWII memorabilia,” Scalise said.
    The Louisiana congressman said that proper labelling for white supremacists should make it easier for lawmakers to know what kind of organizations they are addressing in the future. “Sometimes it’s hard to see through all that smoke from the burning crosses,” he acknowledged.

    The Thinking Housewife: Pretending To Be Apolitical

    $
    0
    0

    Dear Fred,

    Thanks for your email.

    I was unaware of ascribing a specifically political agenda to "The Thinking Housewife" and therefore find myself blindsided by your interpretation.

    That said, other people often see us more clearly than we see ourselves. 

    For example, the "secular press" broke the story of priestly pederasty whereas the lickspittle "Catholic press" - fully aware of the Church's sexual monstrosity - held their tongues as ecclesial authorities wished.

    Concerning politics...

    The word "political" derives from polis meaning "city" and is one component of the basic "city/country" dichotomy that construes "civilization" (from civis meaning "city") as essentially "urban," and "heathenism" (heathen meaning "of the heath") as essentially "rural." (As an aside... The word "pagan" derives from "paganus" meaning "country dweller.")

    Not surprisingly, this "town-and-country" dichotomy is on display in every polity, with cities being "liberal" and the countryside "conservative."

    It is hard to avoid politics since avoidance itself is political. 




    Laura writes:
    McIntyre’s argument is lost on me. I can’t get beyond his shocking support for government aid to single-parent households, which throws such doubt on his judgment, and his statement that each family is owed a living wage and meaningful work by government. I haven’t read his full essay, but he seems to be advocating socialismhttp://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2012/10/neither-romney-nor-obama/
    Aristotle Quote Quotes  Picture #27062
    Chesterton defines "liberalism" as "the ability to imagine your enemy." 

    Laura lacks this liberality of imagination and deals with her conservative enemies by consigning them to Hell. Without qualm, it being "God's Will."

    Liberalism: "Satanic Rebellion Against God?" (The Thinking Housewife)


    Laura's God-damning view (which conjoins politics, sociology and ecclesiasticism) positions her smack in the middle of Jesuit Tom Weston's observation: "You can safely assume you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out God hates all the same people you do." 
    http://www.jrclosaltos.org/archive/person/fr-thomas-weston-s-j/

    If Weston is "onto something," what are we to make of Laura's self-apotheosis and correlative eagerness to pontificate more infallibly than the pope himself, a "papal impostor" whom she has demoted to her own advantage?

    Methinks the Lady doth protest too much.

    Compendium Of "Pax" Posts On "The Thinking Housewife," Laura Wood
    Pax tecum

    Alan


    PS Although Laura does not comment on her correspondent's views (detailed below), she did choose to publish them - in their entirety. By my lights, this editorial decision is emphatically political. (Don't get me started on the content of "15 Specific Proofs"... or the meaning of "America" as direct outgrowth of our predominantly Deist founders. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/06/deism-and-founding-father-links.html)

    15 Specific Proofs of Obama’s Detestation of America



    PPS As for the pope diminishing his stature by "being all things to all people," I disagree. The pope is not trying to be "all things to all people." He is, in fact, leveling the "ecclesiastical playing field" so that all Catholic "voices" have a berth aboard St. Peter's Bark. Plus, it is inevitable that human beings offer opinions on a wide variety of subjects just as Laura's papal darling, Pope Paul IV, opined that Jews should be ghettoized, obliging them to wear distinctive uniforms, practices which made Paul IV the ideological patron of cradle Catholic, Adolf Hitler. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Paul_IV
    "In 1555 Pope Paul IV issued a canon (papal law), Cum Nimis Absurdum, by which the Roman Ghetto was created. Jews were then forced to live in seclusion in a specified area of the rione Sant'Angelo, locked in at night, and he decreed that Jews should wear a distinctive sign, yellow hats for men, and veils or shawls for women.[6] 
    Jewish ghettos existed in Europe for the next 315 years."
    As it is completely absurd and improper in the utmost that the Jews, who through their own fault were condemned by God to eternal servitude, can under the pretext that pious Christians must accept them and sustain their habitation, are so ungrateful to Christians, as, instead of thanks for gracious treatment, they return contumely, and among themselves, instead of the slavery, which they deserve... — Paul IV, Cum nimis absurdum, 1555
    Will Laura publish modification of her obsequious admiration for Paul IV?

    Do not hold your breath: Once "The Official Lies" have been circulated, conservatives never retract, recant or modify since any crack in The Wall of Absolutism represents an existential threat to the whole system.  

    Besides, there is tremendous political advantage in refusing to "un-ring bells," however tinny their timbre.

    Bill Maher: The Zombie Life Cycle Of Republican Lies. They Never - Ever - Die


    On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Fred Owens <froghospital911@gmail.com> wrote:

    Laura is not remotely political and never claims to be political, so there is little reason to point that out. You may just as well say that your local model train club is not political.
    As for Pope Francis -- he has become an expert on everything, including climate change.... This new direction diminishes his stature in my view.... He cannot be all things to all people.
    A homily on kindness to animals might be well -received, but anything approaching learnedness on climate science is not good.
    Bill Sheehan still has his Vatican Library email address, although he is retired from that position


    Fred Owens
    cell: 360-739-0214

    My gardening blog is  Fred Owens
    My writing blog is Frog Hospital

    send mail to:

    Fred Owens
    35 West Main St Suite B #391
    Ventura CA 93001

    Compendium Of Pax Posts On Abortion

    $
    0
    0
    Human Person?
    (Any room for democratic debate?)

    1. Pax on both houses: Abortion Is Sinful

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/11/abortion-is-sinful.html
      Nov 9, 2012 - Despite your opposition to abortion, I would venture that you and your lovely wife .... All 19 New Republican House Committee Chairmen Are.
    2. Pax on both houses: E.J. Dionne: On Abortion And ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../ej-dionne-on-abortion-and-conservati...
      Nov 11, 2013 - If you're a conservative strongly opposed to abortion, shouldn't you want to give all the help you can to women who want to bring their children ...
    3. Pax on both houses: Basil Hume: "Universal Healthcare And ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../cardinal-basil-hume-on-obvious.html
      Mar 27, 2013 - Both sides have valid concerns, which makes the battle tight. But one prominent argument is illogical. The contention that opponents of abortion  ...
    4. Pax on both houses: Abortion Is Now As Rare As When Roe ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../abortion-is-now-as-rare-as-when-roe-...
      Dec 2, 2014 - It's about as rare for an American woman to have an abortion today as it was before the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade 31 years ago ...
    5. Pax on both houses: What Drives Abortion? Income? Or The ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../what-drives-abortion-income-or-law....
      Sep 29, 2014 - Activists and researchers on both sides of the abortion debate agree that these "back-alley" operations are dangerous for women. It's figuring ...
    6. Pax on both houses: Abortion And The Second Amendment

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../abortion-and-second-amendment.htm...
      Jun 26, 2014 - Pax on both houses. The best is ... Abortion And The Second Amendment. Posted by .... Veto Proof Bipartisan House Majority Votes To Curb.
    7. Pax on both houses: Abortion Funding Advances With GOP ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../abortion-funding-advances-with-gop-...
      Jun 25, 2014 - For the first time, the Senate and House Appropriations Committees have both approved bills that lift the ban on abortion funding for volunteers ...
    8. Pax on both houses: Abortion Rate Falls To Lowest Level ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../abortion-rate-falls-to-lowest-level.htm...
      Feb 3, 2014 - Alan: According to trajectory, the U.S. abortion rate will soon be lower than it was before Roe v. Wade. Conservatives assume that an abortion ...
    9. Pax on both houses: Pro-Abortion Spanish Nun-Physician Is ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/09/audio-file-httpwww.html
      Sep 24, 2014 - She's a feminist who's been reprimanded by the Vatican for supporting abortion rights. She's a Benedictine nun in a country where the Catholic ...
    10. Pax on both houses: Abortion: Does the end justify the ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../abortion-does-end-justify-means.html
      May 4, 2013 - Leftists would agree that abortion shall be limited to the first trimester (or in pregnancies where the mother's life is jeopardized), and ...
    11. Pax on both houses: Iowa Abortions Drop 30% Despite ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../iowa-abortions-drop-30-despite-great...
      Aug 28, 2013 - The abortion debate is most muddled by the erroneous presumption among pro-Life advocates that the proscription of abortion will either end ...
    12. Pax on both houses: Hobby Lobby Invested In Numerous ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../opinion-4012014-774145-views-alan...
      Jul 1, 2014 - According to the Green family, interfering with an already fertilized egg is tantamount to abortion—an act unacceptable to the family and one  ...
    13. Pax on both houses: Is An Abortion Ban Really Pro-Life?

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../is-abortion-ban-actually-pro-life.html
      Jun 10, 2012 - The rate of abortion is actually higher in countries where it's banned, suggesting that if you're "pro-life", the last thing you want is an abortion ...
    14. Pax on both houses: Are Abortion Foes Happy The Abortion ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../are-abortion-foes-happy-abortion-rate...
      Feb 4, 2014 - "Before the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, data on abortion in the United States were scarce. In 1955, experts had estimated, on the basis of ...
    15. Pax on both houses: Pope Francis Links

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/11/pope-francis-links.html
      Nov 3, 2013 - Pope Francis Preaches On Abortion, Gays, Contraception And "The .....Pax on both houses: Pope Francis: Church May Fall "Like A House .
    16. Pax on both houses: GOP Legislator From Maine Actually ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../gop-legislator-from-maine-actually.ht...
      Jun 18, 2014 - Republican Maine state Representative Lawrence Lockman is under fire for comments he's made in the media regarding rape, abortion, and  ...
    17. Pax on both houses

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/
      Webb had been contemplating a White House campaign for some time, floating the ..... He nicknamed Wendy Davis, the Texas state senator, “Abortion Barbie.
    18. Pax on both houses: Will You Still Be Pro-Life After She's ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../will-you-still-be-pro-life-after-shes.ht...
      Jan 1, 2014 - See how you rate with "the universal care rubric"... Cardinal Basil Hume: "Universal Healthcare And Infrequent Abortion Are Obviously Linked".
    19. Pax on both houses: Todd Akin's Other Stupid Statements ...

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/.../todd-akins-other-stupid-statements.ht...
      Aug 24, 2012 - Todd Akin's Other Stupid Statements: “the government needs to get its nose out of the education business.” NPR: "GOP Platform Anti-Abortion  ...
    20. Pax on both houses: "Gender," by Ivan Illich

      paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/12/gender-by-ivan-illich.html
      Dec 11, 2013 - Men and women are so very different, Mr. Illich tells us, that ''the special space (and the time that corresponds to it) that sets the home apart ...

    The Republican View Of Small Government


    Despite Disclaimer, "The Thinking Housewife" Still Holds A Torch For Ayn Rand

    $
    0
    0


  1. Paul Ryan: An unusually slavish devotee of Ayn Rand.
  2. ***

  3. Ayn Rand: Atheist Cornerstone Of Conservative Economics
    http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/03/mediocre-philosophy-sells-it-makes-half.html

    Pax On Both Houses: Compendium Of Ayn Rand Posts

    Ayn Rand Really Hated C.S. Lewis And Championed Child Murderer, Dismemberer, Edward Hickman

    Rand and Ryan

    AT The Orthosphere, Bonald wonders why Paul Ryan has not more emphatically rejected his previous enthusiasm for Ayn Rand:
    [A]ren’t we entitled to a major speech in which he totally renounces her and all her works and all her empty promises?
    —– Comments —–
    Daniel S. writes:
    Paleocon writer Thomas Fleming addressed this same subject earlier in the summer:
    What sours the taste of Paul Ryan’s name on my lips is his repeatedly declared affection for Ayn Rand. Some of this praise was, undoubtedly, part of a pandering outreach to Randians and other libertarians.  In more recent years, he has said repeatedly that as a Catholic he is not an “Objectivist,” that is, a follower of Rand’s drab and unoriginal pseudo-philosophy, and I am willing to take him at his word.
    Then what is the problem?  As young people, we are all more or less stupid and do stupid things. Some take drugs or steal cars, and we forgive them. Why not forgive a smart kid who is so depressed by America’s collectivist culture that he falls for an individualist guru?
    If Congressman Ryan wants my forgiveness, he has it, assuredly, but what he does not have is my understanding or sympathy. Ayn Rand was dreadful in every way.  As an intellectual, she offered a warmed-over version of Nietzsche seasoned with borrowed bits of Isabel Patterson. Her ideology of “Objectivism” can be summed up in Rand’s own words as “the virtue of selfishness.”  In other words, greed is good, look out for number one, charity is bunk.  Yes, I get it.  It is the creed of the selfish jerks who make everyday life in America so unpleasant.
    Then there are her really dreadful novels. I did succeed in finishing The Fountainhead, and if someone has a taste for cheap romantic fiction with improbably larger-than-life characters, he might actually like such stuff, though Rand faces stiff competition from the likes of Jacqueline Susann, Harold Robbins, and Victoria Holt.  As for Atlas Shrugged–the book Paul Ryan professed to like–it is really awful beyond words. I well remember my own reaction to the over-quoted first sentence, “Who is John Galt?”  Who could possibly care?
    The less said of Rand’s personal life, the better.  The long-running soap opera of her marital infidelities with her disciple “Nathaniel Branden” (not his real name) have been disclosed in excruciating detail by Branden’s wife.  From the bits I read, it was a lot like the cheating and lying that caused the breakup of the rock band Fleetwood Mac.  It is bad enough that such tacky people exist in our society.  What effrontery they have to parade their dirty little secrets in public.
    Perhaps the worst thing about Rand is the character of so many of her followers:  nerdy little dweebs (as we used to call them back them) who imagine themselves to be supermen.  I used to run into Objectivists all the time, and I could never decide which of their offensive qualities was the most prominent.  Rudeness, arrogance, or imbecillity.
    The whole time that Rand’s beloved disciple, Alan Greenspan, was Fed chairman, I lived under a cloud of dread.  What sort of political class would tolerate a Randian?  This bizarre and inarticulate person had never repudiated his mentor, and here he was, steering the world’s economy until just before the recent crash.  (Must be a coincidence.)
    So, frankly, Congressman Ryan, I am not entirely satisfied with your disclaimer.  To be an ex-admirer of Ayn Rand is a bit like being an ex-admirer of the Marquis de Sade.  There was nothing in Rand to attract a sane, much less a mature human being.
    I suppose, in making my mind up to vote for the Republican presidential candidate for the first time since 1980, I should be more charitable. Better men than Paul Ryan were involved with Rand. My late friend Murray Rothbard, a great economic historian and libertarian guru, was in Rand’s circle for a time. One evening, when the cult was gathered, Rand asked all of them to repudiate Jesus Christ as the source of all evil. All the Randian leaders, duly paid homage to Rand by rejecting Christ, until it was Joey Rothbard’s turn. Murray’s wife was a good Christian and she boldly declared that she had accepted Jesus Christ as her personal saviour.
    “Repudiate her now, Murray!” snarled Rand. By his own telling, the only response from the unbelieving Rothbard  was, “Come on Joey, we’re getting out of here.  She’s crazy!”
    Indeed, she was, and a whole lot worse than crazy. Only in America, whose educational system had collapsed before WWII, could someone like Rand can pass herself off as a philosopher and a novelist. And only in America could Paul Ryan’s political enemies fail to understand what a black mark on his record it is ever to have fallen for such a fraud.
    What the supposedly devout Catholic Paul Ryan is doing legitimizing the crazed, immoral, rabidly anti-Christian Ayn Rand is beyond me.
    Laura writes:
    That’s excellent.

    Buck writes:
    Thank God that Mr. Fleming took the time to set me straight, and that Ayn Rand is so obviously crazy and evil. Otherwise thousands of people would be continuously analyzing, posting and otherwise writing about her and Atlas Shrugged. This could go on for another uninterrupted fifty years.
    Why all the angst about such a dreadful fraud and nut job’s terrible novel? Could it be that millions of people from all walks of life have found her too compelling to ignore? For more than fifty years Atlas Shrugged has never been out of print. Seven million sold and not every top one hundred list, but what philosophy book is? The board at Random House doesn’t include AS in their top one hundred, but the readers rank it number one. AS doesn’t come close to the top one hundred in sales, but there are no books in her unique category. Lawrence Auster is torturing himself by re-reading and parsing AS. Why would he do that? With what other book has he ever done the same? Why does anyone re-read or recommend AS? To turn the reader away from God? I don’t think so. In spite of her dark and “evil” self, she describes the essential nature of one of our greatest threats. She dissects and lacerates collectivism/communism/socialism like no one else. That single element is worth all of the tedious dialogue that one must endure in the reading of AS. I don’t care what she thinks about God. I bet that most don’t care what she thinks about God. I doubt that anyone recommends the book as a ploy to undermine someones faith in our Creator. She has not one wit of effect on my faith. Forget her inane nihilism. But pay close attention to the main thread of that story. It’s power is exactly what more should be reading. Any reasonably intelligent reader can separate the wheat from the chaff. God is not threatened by Ayn Rand. And if readers are, then they had no real faith to begin with.
    All the railing about Paul Ryan being under Rand’s spell, ala Alan Greenspan, flies in the face of what Ryan says. Is he lying? Google “Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand” and read the top ten articles and the links within those articles. You’ll get a very muddled picture. Ryan says it’s myth. But, he’s a politician.
    Paul Ryan is a political hack who will say what he needs to say. That’s his job description. If he’s in a room full of Randians, what’s he going to say? Paul Ryan is himself the classic “moocher.” I love much of what he has to say about correcting our economic problems. But, the man has never had a career outside of politics. He’s been on Capital Hill since he was twenty-two, and has been an career elected politician since 1998. Waiting tables and fitness training has been his only real out-of-government work. He’s forty-two years old. He’s no better than Obama in that regard. So, how is the world can he be made out to be a hair-shirted Randian?
    Laura writes:
    “Pay close attention to the main thread of that story.”
    I can’t. Atlas Shrugged is one of the worst novels I have ever read. Rand is the Danielle Steele of libertarianism. I am convinced, on the basis of its literary flaws alone, that AS will not endure, no matter how many millions have loved it.
    Lawrence Auster has done a good job in recent posts of describing the nihilism and self-worship, Rand’s worthy objections to collectivism, and the literary flaws of Atlas Shrugged. 
    Regarding Ryan, as Fleming says, it may have been a passing thing in his life. That’s understandable. It would be admirable if he explained the problems with Rand’s views to the many libertarians who are her followers. But perhaps he has. I have not closely followed his recent statements on Rand.

    Lawrence Auster writes:
    Buck writes:
    Lawrence Auster is torturing himself by re-reading and parsing AS. Why would he do that? With what other book has he ever done the same?
    I’ve explained clearly why I am doing it. Atlas Shrugged is a unique combination of worthwhile and terrible:
    The purpose of the article I’m planning to write about Atlas Shrugged is to separate what is good in the book from what is bad. Reading the entire book from beginning to end, underlining, taking notes, and thinking about every passage, is a very strange experience, because of the mixture of things in the book that are terrific or good, and things that are bad or horrible. Sometimes on the margin of one page, I’ll write something like “Great,” or “brilliant,” and on the next page I’ll write, “Insane, unreadable.” And part of my purpose is to explain why what is good in the book, and what is insane in the book, are so closely intertwined.
    Also, I want to rescue the book from its uncritical fans and followers, to whom I object as much as Thomas Fleming does; and also from the people who mindlessly trash the entire book, as Thomas Fleming does. As I wrote in the same entry:
    [My purpose is] to differentiate the good and the bad, so that, on one hand, some people will not reject the book wholesale and miss the good parts; and, on the other hand, so that some other people will not accept the book wholesale and be led astray by the bad parts.
    Laura writes:
    I don’t think Fleming mindlessly trashed her books in the above, however extreme his opinion was. He didn’t justify his opinion at length, but he did provide some reasons.

     
    Mr. Auster adds:
     Also, I agree with Buck’s evaluation of the book and with his thoughtful objection to Fleming’s cheap dismissal of the book.
    Laura writes:
    Again, I don’t think Fleming cheaply dismissed the book or Rand’s work. In fact, he didn’t dismiss it at all, anymore than Terry Jones dismissed the Koran. He was highly criticial of it.
    But this statement of his is far too extreme:
    There was nothing in Rand to attract a sane, much less a mature human being.
    There are sane admirers of Rand.
    Mr. Auster writes:
    He says that it is utterly worthless and that no sane human being could find anything worthwhile in it. If that is not dismissal, what is?
    And he cheaply dismisses it, in that, in his usual manner, he just throws a lot of adjectives at it and does not bother considering why sane people would find worthwhile things in it.
    Laura writes:
    I agree he went too far in saying no sane person could be attracted to Rand. That’s ridiculous. However, comparing The Fountainhead to “cheap romantic fiction with improbably larger-than-life characters,” whether one agrees with it or not, doesn’t seem to be just throwing adjectives at it. Also, I guess I see his emphatic rejection of her work as a response to the cult of Rand. There would be no Terry Jones if people always read the Koran in a reasonable way, noting its truths and falsehoods, and never fell under its spell.
    That’s not to say there isn’t a place for more measured assessments of her work. There is.

    Middle Eastern Christians Flee Violence For Ancient Homeland In Turkey

    $
    0
    0
    A photo of a man sitting in the courtyard of Mor Barsaumo church in Midyat, Turkey
    The fifth-century Mor Barsaumo church in Midyat, Turkey, draws Syriac Christians in what was once the faith's heartland, as well as refugees fleeing violence in Syria and Iraq.
      PHOTOGRAPH BY MONIQUE JAQUES, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC

    Middle Eastern Christians Flee Violence for Ancient Homeland

    Refugees flee Syria and Iraq to Midyat, Turkey, which clings to its diminished role as the heartland of the ancient Orthodox faith.

    Tara Isabella Burton
    National Geographic
    Photographs by Monique Jaques, National Geographic
    PUBLISHED DECEMBER 29, 2014
    MIDYAT, Turkey—On most afternoons, Mor Barsaumo, a honey-colored, fifth-century stone church nestled in a warren of slanted streets, draws a crowd. In the narrow courtyard, old men smoke cigarettes and drink coffee, while children kick a soccer ball across the stone floor. In a darkened classroom, empty except for a few desks, a teacher gives private lessons in Syriac, derived from Aramaic, the language of Christ.
    Advised by relatives or other refugees, newcomers to Midyat often make the steps of the church their first stop. Midyat and its environs—known in Syriac as Tur Abdin, “mountain of the servants of God”—are the historical heartland of the Middle East's widely dispersed Syriac Orthodox Christian community. Now the region has become a haven as the fighting in Syria and Iraq has forced Christians to flee their homes.And now, the refugees also come.
    “All Syriac Christians come here. Most of the aid is delivered from here,” says Ayhan Gürkan, a deacon at Mor Barsaumo and a member of the Tur Abdin Syriac Christians Committee, set up to look after Midyat’s Christian refugees.
    Picture of Mor Abraham, a Christian monastery on the outskirts of Midyat
    Mor Abraham, a monastery on the outskirts of Midyat, is one of many in the area. The monastery donated land to create a camp for Christian refugees, though few make use of it.
    Only four of Midyat’s eight churches are still used. Mor Barsaumo is the most central, and hence the easiest for newcomers to find. Its courtyard and schoolroom serve as a de facto community center for local Christians and refugees alike. Gürkan, smoking a cigarette by the church gate, is flanked by two Syrian refugees, Yusep Souleman and Nahir Mirza. Souleman’s grandchildren play alongside local children in the courtyard.
    Gürkan estimates that of the 500 Syriac Christians in Midyat, about a hundred are refugees—most from Syria, with a handful from Iraq. Midyat is in southeastern Turkey, just 32 miles (52 kilometers) north of the border with Syria. Although an official refugee camp for Christians exists in Midyat, built on land donated by nearby Mor Abraham Monastery, few have chosen to live there. This is due partly to the poor provisions, says Gürkan—tents are no defense against the region’s cold winters—but also to the success of the Syriac Christian community at looking after its own.
    “They are our brothers,” cuts in Mirza. “They take care of us.”
    This care is material and spiritual, says Father Ishak Ergun, Mor Barsaumo’s priest, who is also on the refugee committee. Refugees find housing in the neighboring Syriac Christian Cultural Center, in monasteries such as Mor Gabriel or Mor Jacob, or in apartments the committee helps them rent in the city center.
    Picture of Ayhan Gürkan, a deacon in the Syriac Christian faith, reading from a religious book before teaching a Syriac lesson
    Ayhan Gürkan, a deacon in the Syriac Christian faith, reads from a religious book before teaching a Syriac lesson, as children toss a ball in the courtyard of Mor Barsaumo Church.
    The day before, he tells me, another Syrian family came to Mor Barsaumo. He helped them rent a flat from a Christian landlord at a greatly reduced rate; community members furnished the apartment. The committee raises funds—soliciting donations from abroad as well as from wealthier members of the community—to subsidize rent when families are unable to pay. He and Gürkan also help refugees assimilate: accompanying them to hospitals and registration centers and filling out paperwork with them, including applications for asylum in Europe.
    For many refugees, pastoral care is no less important. “We pray for them,” Ergun says. Not long ago, the community held a three-day fast to “call upon God to stop the pressure and to show a peaceful way forward.”
    Ergun had just counseled a family that had trouble sleeping because of “the death, murder that they faced in their eyes,” he says. He provided a Bible in Arabic and encouraged them to read the Lord’s Prayer before bed. “After they read the Bible,” he says, they started to find some comfort.
    Fear for the Future
    Once, Christians dominated Tur Abdin. Monasteries dating to the fourth century dot the landscape: from Mor Gabriel, just outside Midyat, to Mor Hananyo, near Mardin. But Christianity has virtually vanished from the region. From the 1890s through the 1920s, the Ottoman Empire killed tens of thousands of Syriac Christians, a massacre known in Syriac as Sayfo, which mirrored the slaughter of Armenians and Greeks.
    Picture of children in a classroom at Mor Barsaumo Church studying the Syriac language
    Children in a classroom at Mor Barsaumo Church study the Syriac language, derived from Aramaic, the language Christ spoke. Because Syriac Christians aren’t a recognized minority in Turkey, their language can’t be taught in the public schools.
    Today, Midyat’s Christians are uneasy about their culture’s chances for survival. Because Syriacs, unlike Armenians or Kurds, are not officially recognized minorities in Turkey, they cannot teach their language in public schools. And their status as Christians also marks them as separate from their Muslim neighbors.
    “Midyat used to be a Syriac city,” says Gürkan. “Before the 17th century, there was not one single Muslim, not one single Kurd in this area. You see how it has changed. In 1960, there were 1,600 Christian families in the Midyat city center, plus many thousands more in villages. Now there are not even 120 families in Midyat.”
    Tensions between Midyat’s Christians and their neighbors rarely boil over into outright violence, but Gürkan remains afraid. “Whenever there is anti-Islamic action in the West, we are blamed,” he says. “We pay the price. According to Muslims, a Christian is a Christian. We are all infidels to them.”
    Christians in Midyat have been targeted when tensions flare elsewhere, such as the conflicts in 1968 on Cyprus between Greek Christians and Turkish Muslims and the crisis in 2005 when many Muslims worldwide protested the satirical depiction of the Prophet Muhammad in cartoons in a Danish newspaper.
    Picture of Ayhan Gürkan reading from a book in the Syriac language before a church service begins at Mor Barsaumo
    Gürkan reads from a religious text written in the Syriac language in a classroom adjacent to the Mor Barsaumo church before a service begins.
    In 1968, Gürkan says, “they decided who would raid which house, who would seize whose daughters.” The intervention of sympathetic Muslim neighbors, who tipped the Christian community off and helped guard the churches, calmed the situation. “But we don’t forget that trauma. We still have those images.”
    Father Daniel Savci, a monk at the Mor Jacob monastery, was kidnapped by hostile Muslim locals in 2007, although he was later released. Two years ago, Gürkan says, a service at Mor Barsaumo was interrupted by an Islamist who unfurled a Turkish flag. “He could have exploded a bomb.”
    The Christian community now suspects the same man of having started a fire at nearby Mor Gabriel. “We know what happened in Syria, in Iraq ... we know what the Christian community faced,” says Gürkan. He fears that sympathizers of the Islamic State (ISIS) or other organized groups exist in Turkey.
    Just Passing Through Midyat
    Many of the Syrian refugees now arriving in Midyat are the descendants of refugees forced to leave Tur Abdin during Turkey’s Sayfo. They return, Gürkan says, with a sense of fear, one that he himself shares. “There is no guarantee that it won’t happen again tomorrow,” he says.
    Picture of Syriac Christians attending a service at Mor Barsaumo Church
    A priest at Mor Barsaumo church is surrounded by worshippers who are singing select passages from the Bible. In an Orthodox service, nearly the entire celebration is sung.
    Gürkan and Ergun do their best to encourage refugees to stay in Midyat, hoping the influx could bring new life to their dwindling community, but their efforts are often unsuccessful. “We tell them to stay here but they don’t want to,” sighs Ergun. “There are so many Syriac Christian villages in the region; they are empty now. I am telling them that the future of Europe is not clear, either. ISIS can attack in Europe too.”
    A former Syriac language teacher who has been in Midyat for 13 months, Mirza is anxious to leave; he believes that his application for asylum in Germany, where his mother and sister live, is on the verge of being approved.
    Mirza invites me to join him for tea at his apartment at the cultural center, which he shares with his wife and three children. As we walk through the courtyard, he points out another refugee: a man in his early 20s, recently arrived from Aleppo. He stands on the terrace, listening to music on his iPod. He keeps to himself, Mirza says.
    Picture of George Mirza helping his parents in the kitchen of the family's temporary apartment in the Mor Barsaumo cultural center
    George Mirza helps his parents in the kitchen of the family’s temporary apartment in the Mor Barsaumo cultural center, where they wait to learn whether they’ll be allowed to move to Germany. The Syriac community has given them food and accommodations.
    The apartment is small but well-kept, although little light makes it through the kitchen window. The family members gather in plastic chairs around a computer on the kitchen table, where Mirza shows me his Facebook page in Arabic, along with clips and images he has recently shared, nearly all promoting Syriac culture.
    He shows me a chart detailing the similarities between the first ten letters of the Syriac alphabet and Arabic numerals—proof, he says, that our numerical system derives from Syriac. He plays me a YouTube video: a song in Syriac with images of Syriac monasteries.
    There is not much else to do here, he says. He cannot work—one Syriac language teacher at Mor Barsaumo is more than enough—and he is prohibited from teaching in schools. His children do not play with local children, even Christians; he feels they do not understand one another. Nor does he feel able to send them to school. “It’s for Muslim people,” he says. “Not for us.”
    He waits anxiously for the papers that will allow him to move to Germany. “We can’t be citizens here. We have no jobs; our children can’t go to school; we have no future for our children; and we can't go back to Syria,” he says. “So the only option is to go to Europe.” But his heart, he says, is still back home.
    Picture of worshippers leaving a service at Mor Barsaumo Church touching the cross on the door
    Worshippers touch a cross when they enter and leave Mor Barsaumo Church. The gesture is to remind them that they have responsibilities as a baptised Christian and that the church is a sacred space, separate from the outside world.
    Refugees in Their Homeland
    For the four monks at Mor Gabriel Monastery, one of the oldest monasteries in the world, the flight of so many refugees to Europe is a painful reminder of how little is left of their world. A few refugees stay intermittently at the monastery, where they receive free room and board as well as money for doing odd jobs, but many head to Europe.
    Here, Isa Gulten, an archdeacon at the monastery, conducts sporadic lessons in Syriac. This time, it’s for an audience of one: a German of Syriac descent studying to become a priest when he returns to Berlin. “You are listening to the original language of Christ,” Gulten says, reading a passage from St. Paul’s epistles.
    “As Christians, we suffer doubly in the Middle East,” he says, pointing to the difference with Turkey’s Kurds, most of whom are Sunni Muslims. “The Kurds here are persecuted just for their ethnicity. But we are persecuted for both our ethnicity and our faith.”
    Picture of candles, lit before a service at Mor Barsaumo Church, reflected in the glass of a framed picture
    Candles burn at Mor Barsaumo Church, reflected in the glass of a framed picture.
    This feeling of alienation in Turkey is particularly painful, Gulten says, because Syriac Christians see Tur Abdin as their spiritual and ancestral home. “It is shameful,” he says. “We are not foreigners. We are people of this land. We have been here since the time of Adam and Eve! The government builds mosques, schools for Islam, paying a lot of money to the imams. We all pay our taxes and get nothing. Not for our churches, not for our priests.” The situation of Syriac Christians long established in Turkey, he insists, is not so different from that of the community’s newcomers. “Truly, we are all refugees.”
    For now, however, refugee and local alike keep what they can of Syriac Christian culture alive, as they worship at Mor Barsaumo’s twice-daily prayer services.
    As about 50 people file into Mor Barsaumo for a weekday afternoon service—Souleman, Gürkan, and Ergun among them—they begin to chant, in liturgical Syriac, the reading chosen by Ergun: Psalm 91, a prayer for refuge in exile.
    “You who live in the shelter of the Most High, who abide in the shadow of the Almighty, will say to the Lord, ‘My refuge and my fortress; my God, in whom I trust.’”


    Fuji Shioura


    Fuji Shioura
    Breathtaking article that's more relevant now, more than ever! This is precisely why I am committed to building an Aramaic language centered school. Madrashta.com is where and how we can all work together to make it happen for all of children. JFYI Madrashta in Assyrian or Madrassa in Sryiac means school.

    An Exemplar: The Substance And Politics Of Obamacare Evidence In One Citizen

    $
    0
    0

    "Obamacare: Where's The Train Wreck?"

    The substance and politics of Obamacare, in one citizen

    Paul Waldman, Washington Post

    There’s a journalistic trope that has become so common over the past couple of decades that you probably don’t notice it anymore, or just assume that it’s how news stories have always been written. It’s what media scholars call the “exemplar” — an individual person whose story is used as a vehicle to explain the effects of a policy or an event. There’s always a danger that this narrative technique can oversimplify things. On the other hand, the use of an exemplar is a good way to connect large issues to the lives of the people affected by them.
    And every once in a while, a good reporter can find an exemplar whose story so perfectly captures an issue that it does more than just spice up an article, but actually leads us to a deeper understanding.
    So it is with this story in today’s New York Times by Abby Goodnough, who reports on the successes and hurdles of the Affordable Care Act in Kentucky, which accepted the expansion of Medicaid and set up its own exchange. Here’s the beginning of the story of one of the exemplars Goodnough found, which tells us a tremendous amount about where the ACA has come, substantively and politically, and what its future holds:
    Amanda Mayhew is one of the beneficiaries. She earns little enough to qualify for Medicaid under the new guidelines, and she enrolled in August. She has been to the dentist five times to begin salvaging her neglected teeth, has had a dermatologist remove a mole and has gotten medication for her depression, all free.
    “I am very, very thankful that Medicaid does cover what I need done right now,” said Ms. Mayhew, 38. “They ended up having to pull three teeth in the last three weeks, and I would have been in a lot of pain without it.”
    Then a bit later in the article, we learn more:
    A nurse practitioner at Family Health Centers had prescribed anti-depressants after Ms. Mayhew had her last baby in 2013 — at the time, she had temporary Medicaid for her pregnancy — but she stopped taking them when the coverage ended. Now she is back on them, and feeling good.
    “That’s been a big thing for me,” she said.
    And yet.
    “I don’t love Obamacare,” she said. “There are things in it that scare me and that I don’t agree with.”
    For example, she said, she heard from news programs that the Affordable Care Act prohibited lifesaving care for elderly people with cancer.
    There is no such provision, although a proposal to pay doctors to engage patients in end-of-life planning — such as whether they would want life-sustaining treatment if they were terminally ill — was removed from the law after it sparked a political firestorm over “death panels.” The misperception remains widespread: A poll this month by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that 41 percent of Americans still believe the law created “a government panel to make decisions about end-of-life care for people on Medicare.” An equal number found the law did not.
    “If we have Obamacare and the insurance is available to me, I will use it and be thankful for it,” Ms. Mayhew said. “But would I gladly give up my insurance today if it meant that some of the things that are in the law were not in place? Yes, I would.”
    Ms. Mayhew is obviously a good-hearted person. In fact, she’s so considerate of others that she’d give up the insurance that has been life-changing for her, if it meant she could save others from the horrifying things that she has heard Obamacare does, like denying cancer treatments to the elderly. It’s not her fault that what she has heard are outright lies — how is she supposed to know that? She got it from “news programs,” supposedly authoritative sources, which might mean a talk radio show or maybe a certain television network.
    Now let’s consider how the two parties look at Amanda Mayhew and people like her. Start with what Democrats would say to her:
    We believed that it was a terrible thing that you were uninsured. We fought, at considerable political risk, to get you insurance. And now we’re very pleased that you have it. But we really wish you understood the truth about what the Affordable Care Act does and doesn’t do. Please vote for us.
    And here’s what Republicans would say to her (if they were being honest):
    We didn’t care all that much that you were uninsured. We fought with all our might against the law that gave you the insurance you have now. If we could, we’d repeal it tomorrow and take that insurance away. But we’re overjoyed that you believe the false things you do about the ACA — indeed, we encouraged you to believe things like that, even though we knew they were lies. Please vote for us.
    Not every Republican thinks that — there were many Republicans in Kentucky who went along with Democratic governor Steve Beshear’s acceptance of the Medicaid expansion, which made the change in Mayhew’s life possible. But every important congressional Republican does say that, as does every Republican who wants to be president (with the exception of Ohio’s John Kasich, another governor who accepted the expansion).
    You can read those two paragraphs and say that they’re caricatures, warped by my liberal bias. But look back and see if you can find one of those sentences that is demonstrably untrue. Did Republicans care about the fact that before the ACA, there were more than 50 million Americans without health coverage? They certainly never tried to do anything about it. Are they actually disappointed that so many people believe falsehoods about the ACA? Give me a break — they couldn’t be happier, because it makes their political task that much easier.
    Every voter who thinks there are death panels, or that Obamacare means elderly people aren’t allowed to get cancer treatments, or that Obamacare made their insurer use a more limited provider network (a business decision made by a private company to cut costs, which I’ve had people tell me they thought was required by the law) is someone who’ll nod their head at the next Republican candidate who tells them that Obamacare is a horror show.
    At the same time, Republicans know that if they actually took Amanda Mayhew’s insurance from her, she probably would turn against them, as would others who heard her story. There’s a level of obvious cruelty and real-world consequence that no amount of propagandizing could overcome. In a way, both parties are satisfied with the status quo. Democrats are happy that she has insurance, and Republicans are happy that the lies she’s been told keep her from being too supportive of the ACA. So neither of those things is likely to change.

    Paul Waldman is a contributor to The Plum Line blog, and a senior writer at The American Prospect.

    Like Other Conservative Purists, Steve Scalise Doesn't Consider Whom He Sleeps With

    $
    0
    0
    Duke's political views are closely aligned with those of The Thinking Housewife
    a white supremacist and Traditionalist Catholic.

    Compendium Of "Pax" Posts On "The Thinking Housewife," Laura Wood

    Alan: Lacking a sense of irony -- and refusing to believe in psychological projection (a belief would condemn them and demonstrate the validity of good science) American conservatives are so GD holier-than-thou that they consider themselves "the smiting hand of God on Earth) incapable of doing any wrong when, in fact, they live in a perpetual state of doing wrong. 


    "Thomas Aquinas On American Conservatives' Continual Commission Of Sin"

    And what does it say about the intelligence of this powerful politician that -- if his claim is true -- he was too stupid to realize he had signed up to speak at a conference sponsored by David Duke, America's premiere bigot, on whose shoulders the mantle of George Wallace rests.

    At bottom, liberals want to make things better. 

    Conservatives, on the other hand, are certain that they -- and only they -- can make things "perfect."

    Therein lie the seeds, not only of imperfection, but of fascism as well.

    "The terrible thing about our time is precisely the ease with which theories can be put into practice.  The more perfect, the more idealistic the theories, the more dreadful is their realization.  We are at last beginning to rediscover what perhaps men knew better in very ancient times, in primitive times before utopias were thought of: that liberty is bound up with imperfection, and that limitations, imperfections, errors are not only unavoidable but also salutary. The best is not the ideal.  Where what is theoretically best is imposed on everyone as the norm, then there is no longer any room even to be good.  The best, imposed as a norm, becomes evil.”  
    "Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander,” by Trappist monk, Father Thomas Merton



    A David Duke flashback

    Glenn Sargeant

    The big news of the morning, via the Washington Post, is that House Majority Whip Steve Scalise spoke to a “gathering hosted by white-supremacist leaders while serving as a state representative in 2002″:
    Scalise…confirmed through an adviser that he once appeared at a convention of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, or EURO. But the adviser said the congressman didn’t know at the time about the group’s affiliation with racists and neo-Nazi activists.
    “For anyone to suggest that I was involved with a group like that is insulting and ludicrous,” Scalise told the Times-Picayune on Monday night. The organization, founded by former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, has been called a hate group by several civil rights organizations.
    Duke, for his part, tells the Post that the House GOP leader is a “nice guy,” and says he doesn’t know whether Scalise did or didn’t know what the group really stood for, which should help matters. Also, Steve King is standing by Scalise, too, and predicts many House conservatives will do the same.
    Founded in 2000 by former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke (who served as a Louisiana state representative from 1989 to 1992), EURO seeks to fight for “white civil rights.” The group is recognized as a white nationalist hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. As the SPLC notes, the group is largely inactive, serving primarily as a vehicle to promote Duke’s books.
    “EURO already was well known as a racist hate group at the time that Steve Scalise apparently spoke to its workshop, and it is hard to believe that any aspiring politician would not have known that,” Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said in a statement to The Huffington Post. “In any case, it’s worth noting that Scalise apparently did not leave even after hearing other racist speakers spouting their hatred.” While Scalise’s office says he was unaware of EURO’s politics at the time of the convention, other groups knew the background of the group.
    On this, I’m inclined to agree with Ezra Klein. As Klein notes, 1999 comments from Scalise about Duke suggest he was “not pro-Duke, but not anti-Duke, either,” questioning the practicality of supporting Duke and not taking a hard line against his views. But it’s at least conceivable Scalise saw this as the only viable way of undermining Duke, given the realities of Louisiana politics. It won’t take much in the way of more reporting to get to the bottom of that either way.
    Like Klein, I’m willing to believe it’s possible Scalise didn’t know what the group really stood for, even if this may reflect a studious effort on his part to avoid finding out. But that’s only on the basis of what we know now, which could change very rapidly:
    Scalise might well have ended up at the David Duke-backed European-American Unity and Rights Organization without knowing who they were or really bothering to find out. He might well have been trying to destroy Duke by questioning his electability rather than his views. But that’s only because he was practiced at appealing to the kind of people who really did support David Duke and really were sympathetic to the European-American Unity and Rights Organization. And, now that Scalise has risen through Louisiana politics to become a nationally influential figure, that’s the problem.
    The biggest question for Scalise’s future is whether there’s anything else. Now that Scalise’s speech to EURO has been found, and his comments about David Duke unearthed, political reporters are going to go looking for more. If this is the end of it, Scalise might be fine. If it isn’t, then his career is in jeopardy.
    If you look closely at the quotes from Democrats, they would appear to be setting a standard under which they won’t call for his resignation if there are no further revelations. For instance, Dem Rep. Joaquin Castro, a rising star in the party, says only that “if” more evidence emerges that Scalise was “aware of Duke’s associations with the group and what they stand for,” then at that point Speaker John Boehner should urge Scalise to step down.
    Of course, given what we know now, it looks very plausible that more evidence might indeed emerge that Scalise did know what the group stood for.

    Two Year Old Shoots Mother Dead In Walmart

    $
    0
    0



    Gringos are stark raving mad.

    Raving lunatics.


    Clinically insane.


    ***

    "Gun Cartoons and Gun Violence Bibliography"

    80% Of All Firearm Deaths In 23 Industrialized COuntries Occurred In The U.S.
    http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/07/80percent-of-all-firearms-deaths-in-23.html

    “Toy Guns Outlawed At Republican Presidential Convention. Real Guns Allowed”

    Woman shot, killed at Walmart in Idaho by two-year-old son

    (Reuters) - A woman was accidentally shot and killed at a Walmart store in northern Idaho on Tuesday when her 2-year-old son pulled a loaded handgun from her purse that then went off, a county sheriff said.
    The 29-year-old woman was shopping at a Walmart in Hayden, Idaho, with the toddler seated in her shopping cart when the incident occurred, Kootenai County Sheriff Ben Wolfinger said in a written statement.
    Sheriff's officials said investigators were still processing the scene of the shooting, which took place shortly after 10 a.m. in the store's electronics department.
    The woman's identity was withheld by authorities pending notification of next of kin.

    "A very sad incident occurred at our store today in Hayden involving the death of a female customer. We are working with the Kootenai Sheriff's department as they investigate what happened," Walmart spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan said.
    Buchanan said the store had been closed and would remain so until further notice.
    Hayden is a community of about 10,000 people located in Kootenai County, north of Coeur d'Alene.

    (Reporting by Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Sandra Maler)

     View Comments (5285)


    Suicide in the Home in Relation to Gun Ownership, Arthur L. Kellermann, MD, MPH; Frederick P. Rivara, MD, MPH; et al, The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 327, No. 7, August 13, 1992
    Key Statistic: The presence of one or more guns in the home increases the risk of suicide in the home nearly five times. 

    ***

    For young Americans, 15-24, suicide (60% by firearm) is the third leading cause of death


    ***

    Firearm injury and death charts for the U.S. (and the world) 
    are available at the following University of Pennsylvania webpage. 

    There are over 40% more firearm suicides than firearm homicides in the United States.

    ***

    Guns in homes increase risk of death and firearm-related violence

    ***

    Guns in home increase likelihood of violent death




    Viewing all 30150 articles
    Browse latest View live