You Are My Sunshine

A great song to end the perfect day.

Christianity and Torture

Christianity is incompatiable with the use of torture, and Christians that promote or rationalize its use are wrong. Period.

I have a somewhat lengthy post in my blog on the Jay Bybee memos, and I was one of the first to call for his impeachment. Bybee, sad to say, is a self-described Christian.

http://www.mymallandnews.com/2009/04/impeach-jay-bybee.html

I do want to address a proof text for subserviance to government from Romans 13. That chapter starts: "Let every soul be subject unto the higher power. But there is no power but of God; the powers that are ordained of God."

So the question is: who or what is that power? The interpretation used by most conservatives is that power is synonymous with the executive branch in the United States. But, for anyone who has taken fifth grade civics, this is not true. Authority is derived from the people as embodied in the constitution: "We the People of the United States... establish this Constitution for the United States of America." The books of the prophets are replete with examples of individuals standing in opposition to state-ordained injustice. The Bible doesn't support as I read it blind "my country right or wrong" conservatism.

.

Name That Fallacy

Interesting thread on logical fallacies.

Here is my contribution.

No rice is snow
No snow is hot
Thus, no rice is hot

This is a syllogistic fallacy.

Says a reader:

The fact that "No snow is rice" is sort of accidental in Philip's formulation of the fallacy.

His fallacy has the form:
No A is a B
No B is a C.
*. No A is a C

For instance, the following is the same fallacy:

No horse is a centaur
No centaur has wings.
*. No horse has wings

Notice that in this case, every one of the lines is in fact true (in Greek mythology at any rate). However, the argument is still fallacious. So while it is still a bad argument, you can't really reply "No centaur is a horse, false conclusion".

The Good Old Days

The next time you are washing your hands and complain because the water temperature isn't just how you like it, think about how things used to be..

Here are some facts about the1500s: Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May, and still smelled pretty good by June. However, they were starting to smell, so brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odor Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting married.

Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water. The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children. Last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it. Hence the saying, Don't throw the baby out with the Bath water..

Houses had thatched roofs-thick straw-piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm, so all the cats and other small animals (mice, bugs) lived in the roof When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip and fall off the roof. Hence the saying . It's raining cats and dogs.

There was nothing to stop things from falling into the house. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could mess up your nice clean bed. Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top afforded some protection. That's how canopy beds came into existence. The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt. Hence the saying, Dirt poor.

The wealthy had slate floors that would get slippery in the winter when wet, so they spread thresh (straw) on floor to help keep their footing. As the winter wore on, they added more thresh until, when you opened the door, it would all start slipping outside. A piece of wood was placed in the entranceway. Hence the saying a thresh hold.

In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire. Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while. Hence the rhyme, Peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old.

Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man could, bring home the bacon. They would cut off a little to share with guests and would all sit around and chew the fat.. Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with high acid content caused some of the lead to leach onto the food, causing lead poisoning death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous. Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or the upper crust.Lead cups were used to drink ale or whisky. The combination would sometimes knock the imbibers out for a couple of days. Someone walking along the road would take them for dead and prepare them for burial. They were laid out on the kitchen table for a couple of days and the family would gather around and eat and drink and wait and see if they would wake up. Hence the custom of holding a wake.

England is old and small and the local folks started running out of places to bury people. So they would dig up coffins and would take the bones to a bone-house, and reuse the grave. When reopening these coffins, 1 out of 25 coffins were found to have scratch marks on the inside and they realized they had been burying people alive. So they would tie a string on the wrist of the corpse, lead it through the coffin and up through the ground and tie it to a bell. Someone would have to sit out in the graveyard all night (the graveyard shift.) to listen for the bell; thus, someone could be, saved by the bell or was considered a ..dead ringer..

Que Sera Sera

"When I was just a little girl/I asked my mother what will I be?" I like mortifying my kids by singing this delightful Doris Day song. "The future's not ours to see/What will be will be."

A Life on the Ocean Wave

This just makes me just plumb happy. It reminds me of my second grade in a British boarding school where we lisped


A life on the ocean wave,
A home on the rolling deep,
Where the scattered waters rave,
And the winds their revels keep!

Photos That Changed The World

The Photos

A Divine Coincidence?

A reader writes:

The Illinios lottery "evening pick 3 "on the day of the first anniversary of 9-11 was 911.

On November 5, the day after the Illinios senator, Barak Obama, was elected president, the Illinios "evening pick 3" was 666.
I have read that coincidences mean "heads up, pay attention".
I know that 666 was picked a couple of more times over the years, but who was the Illinios senator? The point is it was picked the day after Obama was elected president. I think the 911 pick on the anniversary of 9-11 was a warning and a "pay attention" . I just don't know from who. Is the lottery rigged? I doubt it. Was it God? Probably. I just cannot believe that those two picks on those particular days were simply coincidence.There's way too many numbers out there for such coincidences. I'm not saying he is antiChrist, but I am not saying he's not. He's something that has to do with antiChrist and the end times. That should be obvious to anyone. It's obvious to me.

It is obvious to me that you are predisposed against President Obama and you are looking for a mystical reason to support that pre-disposition.

A concidence does not mean "heads up, pay attention." It simply means that you are making a causal link between two unrelated events. It is an "after this, because of this" fallacy. A number coming up in a lottery has no more to do with Obama than a rooster crowing has to do with the rising sun.

North Korea's Atomic Motivations

There are five ways of attacking with fire. The first is to burn soldiers in their camp; the second is to burn stores; the third is to burn baggage trains; the fourth is to burn arsenals and magazines; the fifth is to hurl dropping fire amongst the enemy.

Sun Tzu

North Korea's motivation in rattling the nuclear saber is to achieve ultimately unification with South Korea. They are playing a long game, and consistent with Sun Tzu's Art of War, North Korea wants to achieve its goals through guile and without bloodshed. "Therefore one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful. " While China's historic motivation has been to maintain a buffer state between itself and the west, it appears that China's ability to control North Korea is dangerously waning.

On April 5, 2009, North Korea tested the Taepodong-2 Rocket again and it was successfully launched. However, even if it was a satellite rocket test, the test is still violates the UN Security Council's decision. Because Taepodon-2's first stage engine is same with "Musudan (Nodong-B)" [31], North Korea claims they have demonstrated Musdan Mobile 4000 km MRBM's reliability.

This means North Korea may be able to develop/deploy several hundreds mobile ICBM -- which can survive from first strike by US ICBM-like DF-31/RT-2UTTH Topol M-- within 7–10 years. (The Soviet Union deployed 3000 km R27U in 1971 and deployed next model 9100 km R29D in 1978.) [32]

Japan Ministry of Defense's analyst Takesada points out that North Korea's desire of unification is similar to North Vietnam, and warns of the possibility of North Korea's compulsory merge of South Korea by threats of nuclear weapons, taking advantage of any US possible decrease in military presence from South Korea, after North Korea deploy few hundreds Mobile ICBM aimed at the US. [33]

If By Whisky

Weasals love this fallacy.

Remember

We remember those who have laid down their lives that others might live. Keep them in our memories. Keep them in our hearts.

Margaritas Joy

Margaritas from Zach Klein on Vimeo.

Yikes!

Love and Quantum Entanglement

Interesting discussion on NPR radio on how relationships can effect health through "quantum entanglement."

Once two particles have interacted, if you separate them, even by miles, they behave as if they're still connected. So far, this has only been demonstrated on the subatomic level.

But Radin wonders: Could people in close relationships — couples, siblings, parent and child — also be "entangled"? Not just emotionally, and psychologically — but also physically?

"If it is true that entanglement actually persists, by means of which we don't understand," he says, "if they are physically entangled, you should be able to separate them, poke one, and see the other one flinch."
This idea — that we may be connected at some molecular level — echoes the words of mystics down the ages. And it appeals to some scientists.

But it infuriates others — like Columbia University's Sloan. The underlying idea is wrong, he says. Entanglement just doesn't work this way.

"Physicists are very clear that the relationship is purely correlational and not causal," Sloan says. "There is nothing causal about quantum entanglement. It's good to be open-minded, but not so open-minded that your brains fall out."

Is Abortion A Civil Right?

A reader asks:

"President Obama said this yesterday; "So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term.

I have one question. Why do liberals now say that they "want to reduce the number of abortions"? If there is nothing wrong with abortion why would you want to limit it? If there IS something wrong with abortion why do you claim it's a "civil right"?"

That was three questions. But I'm not aware of any pro-choicer who thinks that there is nothing wrong with abortion or promotes it as a form of birth control. Abortion is an invasive medical procedure that carries both physical and mental risks to the patient. Women would want to undergo this procedure with reluctance and in consideration of alternative consequences-- in consultation with their doctor not their legislator. Abortion per se is not a civil right any more than driving a car is a civil right. The process to privately decide whether or not to abort is a privacy issue and is indeed a civil right. From this perspective, it seems to me that traditionalists and liberterians-- those who fear and resist the intrusion fo the state into the sphere of individual and family rights-- would have to be pro choice. The president's goal of making abortion legal, safe, and rare while promoting education and adoption seems appropriate.

Sean Hannity's Courage

The coward of cable.

Glen Beck is a Lying Sack of Dog Mess

The Dog Mess

Tattoo Malfunction

Hayden Panettiere's misspelled tattoo. Someone commented: "friend of mine was very proud of his new ink that was supposed to say "Peace Love and Long Life" in Chinese,until a mutual friend, born in the People's Republic of China, said it actually read, "Brocolli Chicken $6.99".

A Red Tribute to Colonel Sanders

A Love Letter From the Right

As I've said to some of your coven...If you boiled GWB in oil, and ate him and killed all the believers in the country, you still wouldn't be happy. You leftists are addicted to power and debauchery. And, like any addict, you destroy yourselves and everybody around you.

The debate continues.





"President Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney spoke on torture yesterday. Obama spoke out against torture, and Cheney gave more of a "how-to" discussion."

Jay Leno

"A new survey shows that the happiest Americans are elderly, male Republicans. In other words---Republicans."

Jimmy Fallon

"You know I miss the Bush administration. At least with those guys, you knew where you stood, which was occasionally on a box while holding electrodes. That's why I was glad to see former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld ... featured in the latest issue of GQ. ... The story is that during the Iraq war, Rumsfeld's briefings to President Bush had cover pages featuring war photography and passages from the Bible. Because obviously, briefings about a war you just launched are a snooze unless you add a little pizzazz. So they added quotes like this one from Isaiah: Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Of course, the answer was, 'The same soldiers, over and over again.'"

Stephen Colbert

"Newt Gingrich yesterday was all over TV. He called Nancy Pelosi a 'trivial politician.' ... A 'trivial politician,' as opposed to Newt himself, who is a very serious, unemployed fat guy who runs a think tank out of his basement."

Bill Maher

Don't Attack Obama's Dog

A lesson from history.

The Basic Substance of the Universe?

Here is an example of a debate I had on a science forum this morning.

Topic: Is there a basic substance that everything else is made of?

Energy

energy isnt a substance

what is substance? atoms? time, love, hope, faith?

...no interactions of energy fields/probabilities? most of matter is empty space

but there is an equivalence between matter and energy

no between mass and energy

why isn't energy susbtance?

mass is no more substantive

what is matter?

because it's a potential

why isn't energy actuality?

to say energy is a substance is like saying 'motion' is a substance

to put it another way, from whence did matter derive?

big bang, everyone knows that

i.e. energy - subatomic particles smashing together in a violently expanding singularity something like that

Postcards From My World

Cubs Slaughter the Diamondbacks



"Do you mind?"


Motorcycle Accident on Hayden Road, Scottsdale


Our Neighborhood

Flip Flopping

When a Republican politician changes his mind, he is prudently responding to new information. When a Democratic politican changes his mind, he is an unprincipled flip-flopper.

Cheney and the GOP

Cheney is hurting the party.

Cheney is helping the party.

Political Plays of the Week

Why did President Obama give a commencement speech at ASU? It is for the same reason that Clinton gave a major speech in front of a veterans group and Reagan launched his successful presidential campaign in New York City. He wanted to demonstrate strength in a place where he was ostensibly weak-- the heart of McCain country. I don't think Obama will neutralize opposition to his stand on abortion by going to Notre Dame later this week. But it will demonstrate once again his desire for dialogue and fairness-- not an insignificant accomplishment in these polarized times.

I watched on our local cable station ASU graduates file past the chancellor to shake the president's hand. I was struck by the warmth Obama showed to each graduate with a bright smile and a few words, and some responded with hugs. It's a moment they will remember for the rest of their lives.

What about his so-called flip-flop on the interrogation photographs? Again, I see this as a superb political play. First, he promoted the existence of those Bush-era photographs, leaving it to our imagination what those photographs would reveal. Then, in consultation with the military, he blocked their release, knowing well that they will most likely be released by court order. Thus, he insulates himself from any blow-back should they get released while reinforcing the distinction of his administration from the prior administration. It is a rebuke at his base that affirms the sense among the general public that he is a moderate in touch with new information from military advisors.

Despotism Under the Law

The Bush military tribunals provided the following protections for war crime defendents, including:

— the presumption of innocence
— the imposition of the burden of proof on the prosecution
— the right to counsel, both to a military lawyer provided at the expense of the American taxpayer and to a private attorney if the combatant chooses to retain one
— the right to be presented with the charges in advance of trial
— access to evidence the prosecution intends to introduce and to any exculpatory evidence known to the prosecution
— access to interpreters as necessary to assist in understanding the proceedings
— the right to a trial presumptively open to the public (except for portions sealed for national defense or witness security purposes)
— the free choice to testify or decline to do so
— the right against any negative inference from a refusal to testify
— access to reasonably available evidence and witnesses
— access to investigative resources as "necessary for a full and fair trial"; — the right to present evidence and to cross-examine witnesses.

At least that is what Andrew McCarthy says in a recent article.

Those may indeed be stated protections, but the reality appears to be closer to the Soviet model, where law is sucked of the substance of justice. During the Stalanist purges in the 1930s, identifying and eventually liquidating enemies of the state followed a meticulous legal path that began with signed search warrants and ended with signed death warrants. The death of each enemy of the state was accompanied by a thick folder of forms, documents, and confessions.

I've been trying to understand why some conservatives still continue to support the amorality of rendition, torture, or incarceration without trial. It may come from a residual loyalty to our last president and a concern that dispensing with such approaches will invite terrorism. Perhaps there is something to be said for that, but that doesn't justify brushing away 700 years of jurisprudence that has developed to promote justice and to prevent despotism under the law.

No Trump Job Security

No past apprentice winners still work for the Trump organization, but they all seem to have done well.

Does Time Exist?

Says a reader:

I tell people that it is a mistake to believe that time began in the Big Bang, and that duration and time are not one and the same like many people believe, so I of course "have to put up or shut up" and then explain when time did actually begin.

I personally believe that time began back in prehistoric times with the first generation of prehistoric man. I also believe that timekeeping was very near the beginning of man's knowledge and he learned and developed many other things from this(Logic, fractions, geometry, math, etc.)

My response:

I think you are confusing two very different questions. You answer your question by saying in effect that time began when humans recognized duration as evidenced by the path of the sun or the changing seasons. But this doesn't address the underlying question as to what time is or even if it exists in any real sense. I think you can convice me in the existence of three dimensions. But how do we know for sure that there is a fourth dimension of time-- that there is "something" other than the now and that "something" causally relates to the "now"?

You apparently consider that there is such a thing as an absolute factor as 'time' outside of human belief systems. My rationalization is that nothing exists for us humans, including the notion of 'reality' (you mentioned 'real time') unless it exists in our minds first. We are addressing the question of "When did time begin?"So 'time' began with a notion of our ancestors, and probably long before the construction of the stone edifices.

I think Einstein put to rest the notion that time is an absolute factor. But is it merely an artifact of human consciousness? Much of the natural world is influenced by time, such as circadian rhythms. It doesn't seem to make sense that humans "invented" time. The Humean skeptic would say that only "now" manifestly exists, not yesterday or tomorrow. Thus, David Hume would insist, we cannot make any claim whatever that the sun will rise tomorrow or the pencil that drops from my hand at this instant will drop from my hand at this next instant. I have trouble understanding your claim that "nothing exists for us humans unless it exists in our mind first." Humean skepticism may defy common sense, but that flavor of solipsism also defies common sense. Thus, it would seem, the music I hear and the colors I see is my (possibly delusional) consciousness, not objectively real air vibrations or light waves. But the question I would ask is: if time is more than a mere comprehensive human apprehension, what exactly is it then? Perhaps the answer is the same answer I would give to the question: when did energy exist? It always was, it always is, and it will always be. Time, like energy, never began. They simply are.

While I agree that humans did not "invent" time (when time is understood to be what others on here have called "duration") I disagree with your reasons for supporting this claim. Einstein put to rest the notion that time is an absolute factor in a particular sense. But what Einstein did not do was to make it something subjective. What Einstein did was to show that time is different when observed from different inertial reference frames in the same way that my pen looks different when viewed from different angles. There is a measure which can be defined on spacetime which is invariant under Lorentz transformations (i.e. transformations from one reference frame to another.) These are called space-time intervals. Understood from this perspective, transformations from one reference frame to another can be understood as rotations in spacetime which turn spatial dimensions (x, y, z, or mixtures thereof) into time or vice versa. So while the absoluteness of time was put to rest by Einstein, he discovered for us a deeper absolute quantity (spacetime intervals).

Camille Paglia's Hate Radio Epiphany

This student of populist AM radio opines.

Talk radio has been seething with such intensity since Barack Obama's first week in office that I am finding it very hard to listen to it. How many times do we have to be told the sky is falling? The major talk show hosts, in my opinion, made a strategic error in failing to reset at lower volume after Obama's election. When the default mode is feverish crisis pitch, there's nowhere to go, and monotony sets in. Lately, I've been doing a lot of tuning in and impatiently tuning out. As a longtime fan of talk radio, I don't think this bodes well for the long-term broad appeal of the medium. I want stimulation and expansion of my thinking -- not shrill, numbing hectoring and partisan undermining of the authority and dignity of the presidency. Rabidly Bush-bashing Democrats shouldn't have done it to the last president either, but that's no excuse for conservatives, who claim to revere our institutions, to play schoolyard tit for tat.

Not that Obama's policies and conduct shouldn't receive sharp scrutiny. Despite my disgust at the grotesquely bloated stimulus package which did severe early damage to this administration, I am generally happy with Obama's eagerness to tackle long-entrenched social problems, although there is sometimes a curious disconnect between what he says and what he does. The degree to which Obama is or is not a stealth socialist remains to be seen.

My giddy aunt, Obama is a stealth socialist?

A reader responded to Paglia's new found disappointment to hate radio's best hits, thusly:

What a refreshing and superb piece by Paglia!

NOT!!!

Yesterday, Xrandadu Hutman, on the comments after Joan's latest, predicted Paglia's latest would go like this:

"I was bemused and controvanklemuddled by Wanda Sykes' classless disembowabblement of Rush Limbaugh at the narcissistic White House Correspondents Dinner. Whereas Limbaugh, that rapaciously churlish master of spoken-word artistry, has a highly successful radio program, what has Sykes done that's left more than a fleeting fingerprint whorl on the collective political consciousness? Limbaugh proves why Republicans lord over the airwaves like Marlene Dietrich vamping for a gape-jawed audience of dilglumptious potanicals; Sykes shows why liberals can't even attend dinner without choking on the arrogant wanklinobbishness of their insouciant bilfonkery. Did I mention that I wrote a book called 'Sexual Personae'?"

What's the difference between this and what she actually wrote? This one is at least funny.

Need I even bother asking Salon again to please, for the love of God, Kick. Her. Out.

The Frustration of Will

Epictetus postulated that it is desirable to will whatever occurs; in this way one's will is never frustrated.Is this a plausible position? Is it possible for a Stoic to live a human life, or merely "the life of a stone"?

I prefer Nietsche's "That which does not kill me makes me stronger." Fatalism of any kind is not reasonable. The corollary is that we must welcome the frustration of our will to do anything that really matters.

Easy Google Profit's Scam

Easy Google Profits is a scam.

Buyer beware.

B & B's Mother Day's Greeting

This is a bit too close to home with my own Frick and Frack.

Do What Thy Manhood Bids Thee Do

From none but self expect applause
He noblest lives and noblest dies
Who makes and keeps his self-made laws.

Sir Richard Francis Burton

A Life With Religion, and Without

Here is a letter to the editor as published in today's New York Times.

Related

Op-Ed Columnist: Defecting to Faith (May 2, 2009)

I am grateful for Charles M. Blow’s summary of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life survey on religious affiliation (“Defecting to Faith,” column, May 2). But I was surprised when he claimed that “science, logic and reason are on the side of the nonreligious.”

As one raised by atheist parents with college and graduate study in physics, plus a doctorate in the philosophy of religion from Columbia, I believe I know a thing or two about these items.

First, if you follow John Dewey in his assertion that “whatever introduces genuine perspective is religious,” then there is no such animal as the nonreligious. Furthermore, historians of science now know that biblical religion was a major factor in the rise of the empirical side of modern science.

Finally, since following Dewey and many others, if everyone has a worldview, whether implicit or explicit, and none can be proved to anyone else who does not share it, then we all “walk by faith, and not by sight,” as Paul put it.

Owen C. Thomas
Berkeley, Calif., May 2, 2009

The writer is professor emeritus of theology at the Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Mass.

Happy Mothers Day, Mom

This will be the first year where I cannot say that to my mother, who died five months ago.

Motion Picture Sickness

I tried to watch Peter Fonda's low budget 1967 plot-free LSD commercial "The Trip" last night, but I turned it off after 45 minutes of torture. I can take only so many "groovie, man"s.

I think I've found the worst movie of all time.

Play It Again, Kitty

A Pirate's Nightmare

USS Freedom

Specifically designed for the "Global War on Terrorism," the 378-foot craft aims at pirates and oh so much more. According to a fact sheet, Freedom can also defy "asymmetric 'anti-access threats such as mines, quiet diesel submarines and fast surface crafts."

Why the Republican Party Is Dying

Here is a thought experiment, especially for those of you who are pro-life. The next time you get your oil drained or your tooth filled, ask the mechanic or the dentist whether or not they are pro-life. I hope you have the integrity to take your business elsewhere if they don't give you an answer you like.

This, in short, is what has happened to the Republican Party. It has been hijacked by Christianists-- people who wear the title of Christian to advance political goals.

Christianists have populated both parties. On the left, many of the early civil right leaders and feminists were devout Christians. Many prominant abolitionists, war protestors, and union leaders were also Christians.

However, something happened on the Christian right that didn't happen on the Christian left. And, to understand this, we have to got back to 1976 with the origin of the Moral Majority. Jerry Falwell rejected the traditional Baptist principle of the separation of church and state to raise awareness of social issues. These planks included rejection of homosexual civil rights, anti-communism, anti-feminism, and pro-life.

Although Falwell disbanded the Moral Majority in 1989, it gave rise to a network of political active conservative churches across the country. The Christian left never had an analagous religious-political structure. With the perspective of history, it is clear that this confederation of political active churches was a Trojan horse that has almost succeeded in bringing the Republican Party to its knees.

Republican politics became victim to a king of Gresham's Law, where the most inflamatory and the most intolerant conservatives marginalized and then eradicated the socially moderate, fiscally conservative wing of the party. The Christianists allied themselves with the neo-conservative internationalists to create Christian triumphantism-- an ideology of Christianity as a universally prevailing political force rather than a universally prevailing moral force. And the rest is history.

The Republican Party is now a twitching shell of itself from twenty years ago and the prognosis is grim. The only chance for the Grand Old Party to rise as a potent political force is to cast the preachers out of the temple and bring back the money changers. A party dominated by moral issues irrelevant to the majority of the electorate is surely a recipe for failure.

Wolfram Alpha

The biggest internet revolution for a generation will be unveiled this month with the launch of software that will understand questions and give specific, tailored answers in a way that the web has never managed before.

The new system, Wolfram Alpha, showcased at Harvard University in the US last week, takes the first step towards what many consider to be the internet's Holy Grail – a global store of information that understands and responds to ordinary language in the same way a person does.

Random Factoids

One of my small pleasures is to read the Sunday New York Times each Sunday afternoon. Its writing is consistently excellent and I always learn something. Here are a baker's dozen of factoids that I wasn't aware of before today.

1. The pay gap between college graduates and those people who did not graduate is 54 percent as of last year, a record high.

2. William F. Buckley was buried with his favorite peanut butter and the ashes of his wife.

3. Henry David Thoreau accidently burned down 300 acres of Concord forest in 1844.

4. Warren Buffett's Bershire Hathaway stick has fallen 39 percent since December 2009.

5. Mine that Bird, with 50-1 odds, wons the 2009 Kentucky Derby six and a quarter lengths ahead of 18 other horses.

6. Carol Ann Duffy was named Britian's poet laureate, the first women in 340 years. Example:

I give you an onion.

Its fierce kiss will stay on your lips,

possessive and faithful

as we are,

for as long as we are.

7. Evidence to date suggests that the swine flu is no more dangerous than the average flu.

8. The 1970 Pontiac GTO The Judge" had a hood-mounted tachometer.

9. Red Sox's Fenway Park, built in 1912, holds 33,000 seats.

10. Microsoft is shutting down Encarta, their online enclopedia, next year.

11. Calcutta is now called Kolkata. Its other names: City of Palaces, Black Hole, Graveyard of the British Empire.

12. Odds of having three multi-platinum albumns: 1/1,650,000.

13. Odds of having a child diagnosed with autism: 1/150.