So Corso, I will write an entry on your question, What is a gene? (actually I had most of it already written and the computer ate it) probably for my next entry.
Oh, and to answer people's questions, the picture was of spicy corn chowder, yes I made the bread, and no I never, ever, ever put butter on it.
We're now one week away from the election. That's the US presidential election, for those of you who have been hiding under a rock at the bottom of the ocean on planet Zarkon VII for the last three years. Before I get started on this year's election, let me just stress to you all the importance of voting. I say, without hyperbole, that choosing not to vote is a stupid waste that spits in the face of what generations of people who knew at least as much and maybe more than you have tried to do. It wasn't all that long ago that people had their fates decided for them by self-appointed leaders. In fact, in much of the world, that's how it still is. So at the very least, show a little respect for the fact that you have some say in how you are governed and vote.
It's difficult to be in your late 20's during this election. I feel like I've experienced enough to know that it's certainly a more important election than the last few, but not enough to be able to more accurately gauge its overall historical importance. However, a convergance of circumstances does seem to lend more creedence to the theory that "this is the most important election of our generaiton," as the pundits are claiming. The most important of which is the fact that there are four supreme court justices who could potentially retire during the next president's term, and almost certainly two who will. That's almost half the court. The next president will potentially have a huge amount of sway in the way our laws are interpreted when he nominates their replacements. George W. Bush is ideologically very far to the right. John Kerry is center-left. Think about that for a moment.
I won't go through a litany of what I believe to the be the failings of the Bush adminstration have been, but suffice to say they are many. He took a difficult situation and made it considerably worse. But what I'd really like to address is a more philosophical problem I have that I believe is embodied by George W. Bush. That is the issue of faith vs. facts. President Bush wears his faith on his sleeve; it is his defining political characteristic. This is a personal issue which, while I might not share it, should have little bearing on his politics. But it does. He allows his religious beliefs to unduly influence his decision making. All decision making. It is the attitude that his mind has been made up and that his opinion cannot be swayed by facts that bothers me. This is the image he has chosen to portray himself with - the steadfast, determined leader. But a true leader knows when and how to change his mind.
The United States was founded by some of the brightest thinkers of the Enlightenment period. That was the time that Western civilization matured - when people came together and decided that a rational, measured approach to all aspects of life based on the scientific method was preferable to superstitious beliefs with no logical or rational reasoning behind them. Progress in all areas; technological, intellectual, scientific, social science, and civil and social rights quickly followed at an ever increasing pace. But not everyone agreed with this philosophy. There has always been a segment of the population who rejected the notion of rationality in favor of an older approach that placed man (and only man, not woman) squarely at the center of the intellectual and moral universe based on beliefs that were primarily religious in origin. Each scientific discovery chipped away at this philosophy, primarily those of Galileo, Darwin and Freud until we were left with the inevitable conclusion that there is nothing special about humans - we're merely apes who are good with tools. Secure in the knowledge that the rational basis for our discoveries would triumph, those of us who embrace Enlightenment values moved on with our own pursuits, confident that people would follow when they saw the logical inevitability of our actions. But those who have rejected the Enlightenment bided their time and consolidated their power. They still exist in vast numbers, and George W. Bush is unequivocally their leader. The "everyman" quality that so many people find endearing in a president who is clearly not every man is his willingness to put aside facts and logic when making a decision and act purely on faith or instinct. And thus, an historical irony, a country founded on Enlightenment principles finds itself with a president who embodies their polar opposites.
I see this election in that light. If President Bush wins it will signal the triumph of those who would rather go back to a dark past than those who look towards a brighter future. The damage that can be done is incalculable. Truly, the barbarians are at the gates of Rome. This is our chance to stop them.
Oh, and to answer people's questions, the picture was of spicy corn chowder, yes I made the bread, and no I never, ever, ever put butter on it.
We're now one week away from the election. That's the US presidential election, for those of you who have been hiding under a rock at the bottom of the ocean on planet Zarkon VII for the last three years. Before I get started on this year's election, let me just stress to you all the importance of voting. I say, without hyperbole, that choosing not to vote is a stupid waste that spits in the face of what generations of people who knew at least as much and maybe more than you have tried to do. It wasn't all that long ago that people had their fates decided for them by self-appointed leaders. In fact, in much of the world, that's how it still is. So at the very least, show a little respect for the fact that you have some say in how you are governed and vote.
It's difficult to be in your late 20's during this election. I feel like I've experienced enough to know that it's certainly a more important election than the last few, but not enough to be able to more accurately gauge its overall historical importance. However, a convergance of circumstances does seem to lend more creedence to the theory that "this is the most important election of our generaiton," as the pundits are claiming. The most important of which is the fact that there are four supreme court justices who could potentially retire during the next president's term, and almost certainly two who will. That's almost half the court. The next president will potentially have a huge amount of sway in the way our laws are interpreted when he nominates their replacements. George W. Bush is ideologically very far to the right. John Kerry is center-left. Think about that for a moment.
I won't go through a litany of what I believe to the be the failings of the Bush adminstration have been, but suffice to say they are many. He took a difficult situation and made it considerably worse. But what I'd really like to address is a more philosophical problem I have that I believe is embodied by George W. Bush. That is the issue of faith vs. facts. President Bush wears his faith on his sleeve; it is his defining political characteristic. This is a personal issue which, while I might not share it, should have little bearing on his politics. But it does. He allows his religious beliefs to unduly influence his decision making. All decision making. It is the attitude that his mind has been made up and that his opinion cannot be swayed by facts that bothers me. This is the image he has chosen to portray himself with - the steadfast, determined leader. But a true leader knows when and how to change his mind.
The United States was founded by some of the brightest thinkers of the Enlightenment period. That was the time that Western civilization matured - when people came together and decided that a rational, measured approach to all aspects of life based on the scientific method was preferable to superstitious beliefs with no logical or rational reasoning behind them. Progress in all areas; technological, intellectual, scientific, social science, and civil and social rights quickly followed at an ever increasing pace. But not everyone agreed with this philosophy. There has always been a segment of the population who rejected the notion of rationality in favor of an older approach that placed man (and only man, not woman) squarely at the center of the intellectual and moral universe based on beliefs that were primarily religious in origin. Each scientific discovery chipped away at this philosophy, primarily those of Galileo, Darwin and Freud until we were left with the inevitable conclusion that there is nothing special about humans - we're merely apes who are good with tools. Secure in the knowledge that the rational basis for our discoveries would triumph, those of us who embrace Enlightenment values moved on with our own pursuits, confident that people would follow when they saw the logical inevitability of our actions. But those who have rejected the Enlightenment bided their time and consolidated their power. They still exist in vast numbers, and George W. Bush is unequivocally their leader. The "everyman" quality that so many people find endearing in a president who is clearly not every man is his willingness to put aside facts and logic when making a decision and act purely on faith or instinct. And thus, an historical irony, a country founded on Enlightenment principles finds itself with a president who embodies their polar opposites.
I see this election in that light. If President Bush wins it will signal the triumph of those who would rather go back to a dark past than those who look towards a brighter future. The damage that can be done is incalculable. Truly, the barbarians are at the gates of Rome. This is our chance to stop them.
VIEW 25 of 32 COMMENTS
I would do a free shot for every electoral vote though lol.