Words Like Locusts Flew From Her Fingers

Where Bigots Come From

Crossing the Line
“It comes back to their culture. I spent some time in Rio when I was in the Navy. They didn’t respect the land in Rio. They urinated on streets, they threw trash, bottles . . . When you come here, you’re going to do what you did in your culture. You’re going to do what you know.”

So, this yahoo ran across some creepy Brazilians in God-knows-WHAT part of Rio (he was in the Navy, after all) and now he’s convinced all Hispanic people are bad. This is the way bigotry works, folks. A person has some bad experiences with people of another race or culture or whatever and they generalize their anger and distrust to ALL members of that group. It’s the usual small-minded bullshit.

This is from a long and very interesting article on the Washington Post web site, by the way.

The article goes on to talk a little about Chris Simcox, president of the “Minuteman Civil Defense Corp”. Our friend, Michael Lewis, told us about an article on the PublicEye.org web site that has some interesting background information on Simcox (the “hero” of the Minuteman group.) According to PublicEye:

He has on many occasions made disparaging remarks about Mexicans, for example blaming Mexican immigrants for a laundry list of ills, including spreading tuberculosis in public schools. He is also prone to conspiracy mongering, alleging that Red Chinese troops are spread out along the U.S.-Mexican border, poised to invade.

He’s a fucking loon, right? I mean… that’s got to be obvious to pretty much everyone. But, hey… he’s against illegal Hispanic immigrants getting jobs — and for someone like George Taplin, the creep I quoted at the beginning this post — that’s good enough. More from the Post’s article:

Taplin grimaces. “The new thing coming in” is the official day laborer site at the old Herndon police station, funded in its first year by a grant of about $175,000 from Fairfax County. “The voters will punish the Town Council for taking that money and for their appeasement,” Taplin seethes, thinking ahead to the elections in May. “Those who voted for it on council are politically finished. They have no idea about our anger . . .”

Oh, they know all about your anger, George. Happily, they also know about people like ME — and I live in Fairfax County, too. I think the Herndon Day Laborer center is a great idea. The politicians who voted for funding the center are getting all my support, so George’s claim that they’re “finished” is a bit premature.

“I know what it’s like to go to bed hungry and to be freezing . . . I also know what it’s like when people don’t treat you with respect because you’re poor . . . But being poor is no excuse.”

What kind of excuse do they need??? These illegals aren’t robbing banks or selling drugs. For the love of God! They’re working honest jobs — and being paid less than they deserve, at that. So Taplin had it rough when he was a kid. He was fortunate to already be living in the wealthiest country on earth. He had options — and he took advantage of them. What happens to people who live in places where there are no options? Some of them come here to work.

I cannot find it in my heart to condemn people for simply trying to make an honest day’s wage.

Dumb — and Loving it!

Cooking 101: Add 1 Cup of Simplicity

Test Your Basic Cooking Knowledge

1. To blanch a vegetable means to:
a. plunge it into boiling water briefly, then immediately into cold.
b. boil it into soft
c. steam it until it turns very pale, or blanched.

2. If a recipe says to “cream the butter and sugar,” it means to:
a. add cream to the butter and sugar.
b. beat them together until creamy.
c. melt the butter, then add the sugar.

3. The instructions say to “dredge” the chicken in flour. That means you:
a. lightly coat the chicken with flour.
b. use the chicken to hollow out, or dredge, a ditch in the flour.
c. sprinkle flour over the chicken.

4. If a recipe instructs you to “fold in the egg whites,” that means you should:
a. briskly stir them in.
b. use a mixer to quickly beat them in so the mixture doesn’t fold.
c. gently combine them by folding the heavier mixture into the lighter whites.

5. To simmer means to:
a. cook over high heat in a liquid that’s at a rolling boil.
b. gently cook in a liquid over very low heat.
c. cook in a liquid that’s just hot enough that tiny bubbles break the surface.

Are people really so clueless? Just out of curiousity, I asked my husband these quiz questions and the only one he got wrong was number 1 — about “blanching” vegetables. Understand, Mark does NOT do much cooking and he’s probably only opened a cookbook 5 times in his entire life. So… are people really this dumb? Apparently so. I have to wonder, then, why they’re trying to use a recipe to begin with. For that matter, why are they even being allowed to use the stove? Isn’t that dangerous?

What’s saddest is that the cooking terms in this quiz are really pretty basic. There’s no reason why people of normal intelligence shouldn’t know them.

Beth Wareham, Scribner’s director of lifestyle publications [says], “I tell them, ‘Why should we dumb it down?’ When you learn to drive, you learn terms like “brake” and “parallel park.” Why is it okay to be stupid when you cook?”

Good question, Beth. Why is it okay to be stupid about anything? Oddly enough, the first thought I’ve come up with on this is that it’s all the fault of Microsoft. I hate how the Windows operating system is designed with the presumption that all users are complete idiots. By “dumbing down” the way people use things, the lazier members of society (and there seems to be an awful lot of them), eventually just quit trying altogether to understand anything that’s even slightly complicated. People approach new things — like computers — with the presumption that it’s too much for them to understand. Just as an example, I’ve been truly dismayed by the number of people I know who have PAID to have someone put additional memory into their computers. (Maybe I’m just peeved they haven’t paid ME to do it!) Adding memory to a desktop computer is one of the easiest hardware jobs there is. It takes all of… oh… 5 minutes? And yet, I know a woman who paid big bucks to have someone do it!! Doh!

So…anyway… I digress. My point is that far too many people are enthusiastically embracing being stupid. Heh… this does explain an awful lot about how Bush was re-elected, though, doesn’t it?

Polygamy

Pandora and Polygamy
What is historically odd is that as gay marriage is gaining acceptance, the resistance to polygamy is much more powerful.

Charles Krauthammer has a really well-considered editorial in the Washington Post today. I agree with him that if we’re going to accept that gay people are entitled to marry because their love is genuine (as, of course, it is), then there’s no good reason for pre-supposing that groups of more than two people (gay or straight) aren’t also entirely capable of a genuine “marrying” kind of love.

In principle, I have no objection to polygamy — other than that it could make divorce and inheritance laws a lot more complicated to enforce. It’s not something I personally would probably ever be interested in — I like a more exclusive sort of relationship — but, hey, if other people want it, why not?

The Bible: History, Poetry, Propaganda

Does the Bible Tell Me So?
This radical notion—that the Bible not only isn’t factual, it’s not always right, either—may be frightening to many religious Christians, but it’s what lets readers and participants join this ancient and ongoing conversation.

Okay, so the big argument with Mary T. about whether the Bible is inerrant has been over for more than a month — this article in the online version of Mother Jones magazine fits right into that discussion, though.

To read the Bible as a conversation is to read it as a question, not an answer, a starting point, not a final declaration. It’s not easy; it takes energy to suspend our own assumptions and welcome surprise.

It’s a great article — It makes me want to sit down with a Bible and start reading.

Wolf Populations Recovering — Now Let’s Start Killing Them Off Again!

Duluth News Tribune | 03/16/2006 | Feds have wolf delisting plan
Gray or timber wolves were extinct in all of the lower 48 states in the 1970s except for the Superior National Forest in Northeastern Minnesota. The federal government stepped in to protect wolves in the mid-1970s. Since then, wolf numbers have grown exponentially in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and eventually in the northern Rockies.

The plan is that Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin will take over “management” of their wolf populations themselves, instead of the federal government providing protection via the Endangered Species Act. Isn’t that just a swell idea? (I’m sarcastic here, in case you wondered.)

With state “management”, the wolves could be hunted. Now, I ask you: what kind of sick fuck wants to hunt and kill a wolf??? Are these really the sorts of people we want wandering around loose?

This is just another example of the sort of rape-and-pillage “environmentalism” that’s been coming out of the Bush administration since 2000.

Bush Attemps to Wield Logical Fallacy — Educated Onlookers Unimpressed

Bush to Restate Terror Strategy
But the new version of the strategy underscores in a more thematic way Bush’s desire to make the spread of democracy the fundamental underpinning of U.S. foreign policy, as he expressed in his second inaugural address last year. The opening words of the strategy, in fact, are lifted from that speech: “It is the policy of the United States to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.”

GEORGE W. BUSH.

THIS IS THE LOGIC POLICE. I REPEAT, THIS IS THE LOGIC POLICE.

PUT DOWN THAT FALSE DILEMMA AND COME OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE WITH YOUR HANDS UP.

Do I even need to say it? Again?? If Bush is so keen on bringing Democracy to all the world, then why doesn’t he start with some of our allies in the Middle East? Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, for example?

What’s that you say? It’s not as critical to make those countries democratic because the people who lead them are benevolent??

Ah… then, contrary to what our President implies, maybe a country can have some form of government other than a Democracy and still not be tyrannical? Hmmm.

It’s not that I want to beat this topic to death — really I don’t — but when are Bush and his entourage of sycophants going to get it through their thick skulls that Democracy isn’t the answer to all the worlds problems. Forget trying to convert the world to Democracy! It’s presumptuous, boorish, and betrays an indifference to cultural preferences. Instead, the United States should be focusing on the goverments of all countries (whatever kind of government they are) providing clean water and sanitation and education and healthcare to the people who live there.

The Checkout

The Checkout – A Consumer Report By Caroline Mayer
[The Consumer Action Handbook] is issued annually and this year’s is updated to include information about digital television and the new Medicare prescription drug plans. It also has a list of 13 quick tips to make you a wiser consumer, including “Say ‘No’ to credit insurance offers” and “Extended warranties or service contracts are rarely worth what you pay for.”

I only recently discovered Carolyn Mayer’s The Checkout column on the Washington Post web site and already I’ve learned several interesting and useful tidbits.

If you spend money — and who doesn’t? — she definitely worth reading.

Chris Mooney to Speak at Alliance for Science Meeting

Announcements | Alliance For Science
Chris Mooney is Washington correspondent for Seed magazine and a senior correspondent for the American Prospect. He focuses on issues at the intersection of science and politics, and is author of the bestselling book The Republican War on Science, dubbed “a landmark in contemporary political reporting” by Salon.com and a “well-researched, closely argued and amply referenced indictment of the right wing’s assault on science and scientists” by Scientific American. Among other accolades, Chris was recently named one of Wired magazine’s ten “sexiest geeks” of 2005.

Heh, heh… jeez, with creds like those, a person would be CRAZY to miss him!

I think “Alliance for Science” is the name adopted by the group formerly known as The Message Group. If so, they made a smart decision. “The Message Group” was kind of a dumb name. Anyway, check out their web site — they’re all about keeping REAL SCIENCE in the schools and preserving the distinction between science and religion. These are good things.

Oh… and, for some insight into just who this Chris Mooney guy is, you can read a Washington Post online Q&A session with him here.

Rich State, Poor State, Red State, Blue State

What Kind of Hater Are You?
One of the hottest political science papers floating around the political world and the Web comes close to solving the mystery of how Democrats can do so well in certain well-off places and still not be the party of the rich.

Ah… well, I can explain that!

The divide between people who support George W. Bush and people who don’t really has nothing to do with wealth. It’s all about wisdom.

What is wisdom? Here’s my definition: it’s education mixed with empathy and a good command of deductive and inductive reasoning. A lot of the very technical and scientific fields may give a person much knowledge and great reasoning skills. A strong liberal arts background may encourage greater empathy. A person needs BOTH, though, to be wise. So… what we’re talking about here is people who’ve had a really good well-rounded education being the most likely to dislike Bush.

Yes, yes. I know that sounds like the worst kind of elitism, but — think about it. Haven’t we all met people who have completed a fair amount of formal education (maybe into graduate school even) but who are…well…kinda dumb? They’re like well-trained monkeys. They learrned early-on how to do the “academic trick” but when it comes to real wisdom they just can’t make the grade.

Anyway… so THAT’s why the rich (and possibly well-educated) people in some parts of the country (like the south) have tended to support Bush and the rich (well-educated) people in places like New England have tended to NOT support Bush. It’s all about the kind of education people have. People who’ve been taught to take a broad historical view of the world, whose education in the liberal arts have made them more empathetic — people who are wise — are naturally going to be repelled by Bush and his ilk.

Anyway, I should explain the title of this post. It’s a reference to a paper mentioned in the Washington Post editorial I quote above. Apparently, the authors of the paper try dissect out why it is that rich people in some parts of the country don’t vote like rich people in other parts of the country. I think they’re following a false trail. Income’s got little to do with it. (Income tends to correlate with education — that’s all.) What I’d really like to see is a study comparing Democrats and Republicans on type of education and scores on various sorts of IQ tests. I think that would answer the question for them.

Kooks on Parade, Part 4

Ghost Hunting
Members of the American Battlefield Ghost Hunters Society (ABGHS) will be online Monday, March 13, at 1:30 p.m. ET to field questions and comments about ghost hunting and the society.

I hadn’t even begun reading the actual transcript of this Washington Post online Q&A session before I knew it would be something I’d need to blog about. Get this: besides all the usual ‘sensitives’ and ‘mediums’ and such, the ABGHS also has [snicker] a ‘science officer’. Maybe he’s one of the people who assists the ABGHS “Wolf Pack” team leader in carrying out what is referred to as the “Intuitive Science Method” of investigation. To be fair, though, the WP article (cited at the end of this blog entry) does make it sound as though he’s actually a pretty normal sort of guy. You have to wonder why he’s wasting his time wandering around the battlefields with this crew. (“Wolf Pack”, by the way, is the name of ABGHS’s “elite” team of investigators. I guess the other teams are composed of just your 2nd and 3rd rate psychics.) Anyway, so I’m really curious about this “Intuitive Science Method. A Wolf Pack team member describes it:

The method includes using your intuition along with scientific documentation and methodology so that the results cannot be desputed [sic]. It’s definitely a very interesting scientific method and no one else is doing it to the degree that we are, with the exception of those we train who take classes with us.

Heh, yeah… I bet. Isn’t the very idea of relying on intuition in any way pretty much contrary to the whole principle of Science? Anyone who’s taken even an introductory course in the Scientific Method should be able to tell you that relying on personal intuition is one of THE most common ways people screw up when they’re trying to do science.

There’s so much here to question…

One researcher I know ingests large amounts of potassium before a “session” to help her get more electrical activity in her brain and body.

What a foolish and dangerous thing to do. Hyperkalemia — an excess of potassium in the body — can kill you.

Here’s an amusing claim:

We have also captured [with a NIR camcorder] a wolf materializing out of a paranormal myst.

How, I wonder, does one distinguish a “paranormal” myst from a regular old natural myst. I guess it depends on your mood.

You can’t prove a negative. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You get data that supports a particular theory, or you don’t.

Uh… no. Absence of evidence isn’t PROOF of absence, but it IS in fact evidence of absence. Put more simply, I may not ever be able to PROVE there’s no such thing as ghosts (or invisible pink unicorns that guide our destiny), but as the proportion of compelling evidence for ghosts dwindles (that is, evidence that cannot be explained more simply by natural events), the likelihood that there really are ghosts becomes increasingly remote. Occam’s Razor, Inductive Reasoning and all that. Nevertheless, I’ve been astonished (really! astonished!) by the number of otherwise apparently sensible people I’ve met who believe in this nonsense. It just goes to show — the human capacity for self-deception is vast indeed.

If this sort of things interests you (even if you just enjoy laughing at it), you might also want to check out the Post’s related article A Stakeout for Civil War Spirits. See, now… for ME, that would mean digging around in some old house looking for bottles of antebellum scotch.