Villainous Vendor of Vacuous Vitriol

The thing that strikes me about Ann Coulter - and those of her ilk - is that they have no trepidation about wading out into waters clearly over their heads. Ann doesn't appear to give a second thought about the fact that she is woefully unqualified to offer a polemic against the "fable" of evolution. She feels no sense of embarrassment about not only failing to refute evolutionary theory, but - worse - misunderstanding the basic arguments and lexicon of the "controversy" at even a cursory level. She merely looked for assistance from her ideological camp. She regurgitated the dubious theories of Behe, Dembski, et al without any critical analysis. "Your views serve my argument well.... I'll quote you here, and cite you there.......” Never mind looking at any contravening arguments.

She mocks the evolutionists for referring to "microevolution" asserting that they are obfuscating the simple truth by muddying the waters with such meaningless distinctions. Coulter opines that the term "microevolution" is akin to calling flat-earth theory, "micro-flat earth theory" which would lend the absurd view more credibility. I guess the prefix "micro" really confuses her........

With Ann, it's as if she just rambles on her keyboard the same way she does on television. Vapid - and intellectually dishonest - assertions are her modus operandi . Her intent is not to discover the facts, but to cherry-pick the "facts" in the service of her rhetoric and propaganda goals. She feels no ethical obligation to present her opponents' arguments fairly, to research the issues with the humility of a student, or to contribute to the "conversation" in a meaningful and enlightening way. Her single selling "quality" is her disdain for courtesy, her reckless defamation, her shameless rudeness; in these areas this one-trick pony knows few equals.

Ann will continue to sell books to the millions of sheep who'll line up to gobble up her latest hastily published (poorly researched) intellectual junk food; her drivel confirms - it does not challenge - their innate prejudices. Such persons can remain both stupid and lazy while thrilling to the way Ann really sticks it to her victims like a WWF hero. On the positive side, Ann's venturing into more empirical realms will be her undoing. When irrationally vilifying her political opponents she looks stupid enough. To give her enough rope to hang herself by venturing into less subjective realms is - in the long run - quite amusing.

Ronald Reagan - Greatest American?

I just finished watching The Discovery Channel’s Greatest American program.

Our fellow Americans voted; here are the results:

1) Ronald Reagan [WTF!]
2) Abraham Lincoln
3) Martin Luther King, Jr.
4) George Washington
5) Benjamin Franklin
6) George W. Bush [You gotta be kidding!]

Now, I know I have to move to CANADA!

Other figures who inexplicably made the top 100 nominee list [in no particular order]:

Oprah
Dr. Phil
Michael Jackson
Elvis
Billy Graham
Barbara Bush
Laura Bush
Tom Cruise
Mel Gibson
Rush Limbaugh
Madonna
Michael Jordan
Condi Rice
Donald Trump
Martha Stewart

I think our fellow Americans lack historical perspective overall. IN 200 years, Reagan will be a paragraph in the history books, while Lincoln will remain a chapter. It seems the voters have been affected by the recency of Reagan’s passing and their own historical ignorance. Celebrity does not equate with greatness.

One way to make the vote more meaningful would have been to require that any nominee must have died more than 25 years ago. This would eliminate the skewing due to recency effects and historical ignorance.

Gawd Bless America!

Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist Christian

Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist Christian [Text taken entirely from: http://www.evilbible.com/Top_Ten_List.htm whose policy permits such credited "thievery" ]

• 10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, [yet] feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.
• 9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, [yet] you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.
• 8 - You laugh at polytheists, [yet] you have no problem believing in a Triune God.
• 7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, [yet] you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!
• 6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, [yet] you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
• 5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), [yet] you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
• 4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering, [yet] consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."
• 3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.
• 2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
• 1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - [yet] still call yourself a Christian.
  

Women as Property

Exodus 20:14 “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” Old Testament punishment - Leviticus 20:10 “And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.”

The issue here is one of property rights – not marital sanctity. Consider that polygamy was common and condoned (a man with many wives {polygyny} that is – never a woman with many husbands {polyandry}), the use of concubines was accepted, and surrogate reproduction (the old-fashioned way) was a recurring motif in Genesis.

This is undeniable to any intellectually honest person – that is, one who has no prior emotional commitment that would force him to equivocate and deny the distasteful facts - who has conducted even a cursory review of the Bible.

Further reading for your spiritual pleasure:

“When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.” Deuteronomy 20:12-14

“If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.” Deuteronomy 22:28-29

“If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with [i.e. rapes] her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbor's wife.” Deuteronomy 22:23-24

They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil. (Judges 5:30 NAB)

……… ad infinitum

[For further inspiration see: www.evilbible.com]

Feigned Outrage Over Newsweek Article

As Alanis Morissette sings, "Isn't it ironic?" Scott McClellan, the White House spokesperson, expressed moral outrage at the publication of a Newsweek article that indicated a desecration of the Quran at Guantanamo interment camp. We, as intelligent citizens, are supposed to find a causal link between that article and the outbreak of violence in Pakistan. Damn those traitors at Newsweek! How dreadful!

The truth is that anti-American sentiment was already at explosive levels in Pakistan. According to Afghan president Hamid Karzai those riots had nothing to do with the article. Even Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers said the Pakistani violence was attributable to other causes. Hmmmmmm.

Do you suppose the Bush administration was offering a red herring for our consumption? I think so. Things aren't faring so well with the Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld/Perle world reconstruction plan. It must be the "liberal media!"

As today's New York Times reports, according to a military inquiry, incidents of Quran desecration have occurred. Surprised? When the leadership advocates a culture of disrespect the chain-of-command will spread it like an infection.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/04/politics/04koran.html?th&emc=thp

We have heard about abuses of detainees for some time. Was the Newsweek article really a scoop? Give me a break. Mr. McClellan we're not that stupid. Nice Try.