Posts Tagged ‘science’
(Do you ever have days where you can’t get back to a draft to get it posted? With my apologies, this is a several-days-strung-together round-up.)
Massively rich, philanthropist rock star’s skyscraper will be on land seized by the government?
Jim Tonkowich muses on reading Brideshead Revisited through bifocals… (There’s a point. Really.) I’d been led to believe that Brideshead Revisited was a book I should avoid like the plague. Perhaps I was misled?
Michael Novak suggests that now is not the time to rehearse grave doubts about the President-elect. I find myself more or less in agreement. Or, as Mark Steyn puts it, “As for us losers, there’s no point going down the right-wing version of Bush Derangement Syndrome.”
That’s not to say we can’t still wonder if the media isn’t a bit too personally invested in Left-wing politics. I wouldn’t know, personally. I asked myself why I was giving the news-cum-entertainment industry so much of my time, and couldn’t come up with a good answer, so these days I give them far less time to try to mislead me or try to convince me that celebrity watching is for some reason important. (Do you understand their obsession with performers? The fascination eludes me.)
I wish I’d linked to this before this election, but (for future reference) there’s something to remember when you vote in the United States of America – lot of blood was shed to turn us into citizens instead of subjects. And there is, indeed, a difference between citizens and subjects (and nothing that says citizens can’t revert to subjects if they aren’t careful).
And nothing says people can’t cross party lines when the party crosses them. Heh. I wish there had been more of them, of course, but, well… you take what you can get, right? I would also like to steal a quote made in passing in this post, because I also depend on a small business for my livelihood: “Sylvia has worked in small business her entire life so she’s a natural Republican; she knows how government just gets in the way of business and free enterprise.” Oh, my, yes. Our costs and headaches are going up in January, again. Even if McCain had won, we were looking at cutting hours of operation and/or getting rid of an employee so that we’d have enough to pay the others. Needless to say, we hope we can hold the line there, but we doubt the Democrats will help matters.
Patrick over at The Paragraph Farmer has had several good posts lately, but the quote I can’t resist is from a pre-election post (with lots of links I should probably go back and read). Sayeth Patrick:
Christians in my own church and elsewhere have been urged to pray for a pro-life outcome “no matter which candidate wins.” Heartfelt advice like that goes a long way toward preserving tax-exempt status in a litigious society, but let’s not kid ourselves: a pro-life outcome with the Republican ticket is a good bet, while a pro-life outcome in the aftermath of an Obama/Biden victory requires a miracle of the kind that slapped Saul upside the head on the road to Damascus.
I’d say that cuts to the car chase.
Patrick also has some wisdom from Michael Crichton on science versus consensus.