Archive for January 2011

Church finances and the limits of federal power

January 20, 2011

An interesting look at the fiscal situation between government and churches historically and in the US.


“[T]he issue which divides, then, is that secularists do not give assent to  the divine origin and  nature of the Church…. Thus, separation of church and state, which began in part to protect the church, ironically has turned on its head and become a tool for confining the Church.” Carl H. Esbeck, “Toward  a General Theory of Church-State Relations and the First Amendment,” IV  Public Law Forum (1985), pp.  328-29.

Mass murder rampage in Arizona: Compilation review

January 17, 2011


I like the pushback on Democrat propaganda. Used to be the Republicans or conservatives were too slow, too moderate, and too leery of giving offense to do any real moves requiring agility.

Political Correctness and right response

An actual proposed solution, that isn’t based upon personal ambition.


A blast to the blast, tying in CPUSA of today, just as I remembered the CPUSA of Lincoln’s Brigade.

Broken Blade: First Impressions

January 9, 2011

Broken Blade

Came across this animated cinematic experience when looking at the releases for Spring 2011. I noticed that it came along with the brand name, XEBEC, which has so far produced 3 titles that I gave a 100% score to (5/5 stars).

So far I’ve only seen 2 of the 5 movies.

They were well worth my time. In general, the themes for this movie serialization (aka mini series) are mecha, political turmoil, war, different fundamental basis for technology development for parallel evolution. Of particular note is the world here. The presentation and detail orientation is top notch. The draw is immediate and powerful. The world is presented in 3 forms of narration.

1. Personal narration by touching upon the emotional relationships binding the primary viewpoint characters.

2. Visual impact from the landscape and entities in motion.

3. Spoken narration from a third perspective concerning the world construct and the previous plot development in earlier episodes.

Compared to such movies as Avatar, I would say Broken Blade is 1000% better. In other words, 10 times better. The enjoyment from watching 50 minutes of Avatar translates to as equivalent to watching 5 minutes of Broken Blade.

Happy New Years

January 4, 2011

As a greet for the coming spring, here’s a list of links Book posted when she got back.

I highly recommend the article on what questions to ask LibProgs.

On Conservative brains vs Liberal Progressive Smart Power

January 4, 2011

To explain Grim and BillT’s observation, the Left creates social and class constructs in order to foment disorder and chaos. Thus the rich become “evil” and thus a threat. But it’s not a real threat, meaning if you point a loaded gun at your head, it’s a real threat. It’s not a real threat if you take a paper airplane and point it at your head instead.

Rather than saying that liberals have less of an ability to recognize threats, thus they have lower true positives and lower false positives compared to conservatives that have a heightened perception of potential threats: the truer statement is that the Left disregard real physical dangers in place of imaginary, socially constructed ones, while conservatives focus a lot more on physical dangers and less on imaginary, socially constructed dangers.

This is consistent with both behavior from the Left and the Right. Christians don’t erupt in violence when you insult their religion. Leftists, erupt in violence all the time, especially when “marching for peace”. Islam is even more critical in this venue, as they erupt in violence, at anything. Islam reacts to everything strange as if it was a physical threat, employing massive violence and ruthlessness. Must have been a great help when conquering Persia and Arabia.

It’s why Republicans, who seem to recognize foreign dangers from North Korea or Iraq, act like they are buddy buddy with the likes of Robert Byrd, George Soros, Ted Kennedy, Obama, or the Clintons. They don’t treat their domestic insurgency as if they are real enemies, real threats, while they do treat foreign insurgencies as real threats.

I think both states of mind are unnatural. One should have a proper balance between taking care of social/anti-social threats and asocial threats. One should not disregard the social for the asocial or vice a versa.

The background discussion and scientific research available at the link on top.

On Love and Cheaters

January 4, 2011

Compiling some different things I’ve heard and seen, this is my take on the whole cheating issue.

If a man settles for something because he gave up on his ideal, then he’ll more likely succumb to temptation. Because he got into the habit of thinking, “I could have something much better”. It’s not a state of mind designed to generate happiness. And resentment usually gets produced over time, even if the man doesn’t know it. He’ll always be thinking “I had to settle for her, when I could have… (a woman comes around) her”.

This is basically a man who has given up on his own dreams and ideals. He has become, if not corrupt, at least the prerequisite state for it. There’s also spoiled rich boys who have inflated sense of entitlement. So they’re always thinking that there’s somebody better for them then what they got. An internal dissatisfaction that really comes from their own insecurity and spoiled brattishness. Can’t really cure that just by going for another woman.

Then there’s the fact that love blinds people and often makes them slavish devotees who forgot that they are part of the mammal class that actually have spines. If they stick themselves to their SO all the time, they don’t have a life. That eventually starts making people miserable and thus temptation would call in. The other side of the coin is when a person is not devoted enough and keeps thinking that “freedom” means they are free to do anything they want, regardless of the wishes of the other person in the relationship. Then you have temptation calling because there’s no bond going on. Too strong of a bond, too weak of a bond, it seems to end up the same way one way or another. Dissatisfaction. Which leads to accepting temptations. People always think the grass is greener on the other side, but only because they have an internal doubt and wish they aren’t doing jack to fulfill. Obviously things would look better if they could get it, but they’re making no progress so they start fantasizing. Natural instinct for human imaginations that allowed us to create fire, tame animals, and become the dominant predator on this planet. Somebody “imagined” a solution to a problem they couldn’t solve and it worked.

There’s also the curious matter of innate human weakness and evil. Meaning, some people are just so weak they’re going to cheap anyways, regardless of whether their man or woman is good or not. Just how it is. If you can’t completely eradicate that population, then all you can do is to avoid falling into association with such people. But a lot of people don’t have the social or street smarts to recognize “evil” or “bad” when they see it. And public education is no good for “educating” people on this matter. Never was intended to, for that matter. Just look at how many people fall for cons. Why would someone believe a complete stranger, as opposed to say… their lover? Doesn’t public education education people on how to avoid the “bad”?

Even criminal psychologists, who supposedly invest their life career into the matter of understanding the criminal mind, why people kill, cheat, skill, and so forth, don’t truly grasp the issue in terms of applicable solutions. If they do, their knowledge and expertise becomes an esoteric topic not available to the general public. And thus not adopted by the popular league.

This can be framed in the same sense of Grim’s Mumbai attack scenarios here in America. What is the solution to this temptation, this desire, this vulnerability. Centralized solution sets like TSA or armed military martial law patrols? Or de-centralized solution sets like arming half the citizens in any particular area such that they can successfully resist or deter such attacks?

When it comes down to it, people make decisions on who to love and how they act, based upon their own personal viewpoint. There’s no solution to it, other than to get people to make better decisions. But there are generally two schools on this matter. You can force them do so using RULES and LAWS and centralized authority, even societal pressure which is the same thing. Or you can get them to decide, on their own, due to their own growth, maturity, and thinking (yes, thinking. Some people don’t actually think for themselves, as surprising as that may be to some).