Making Nixon Look Good

Via Pundit Kitchen:















The Economist confirms this sentiment:

Richard Nixon and George Bush senior offered mastery of foreign policy. Ronald Reagan offered a revolutionary mixture of free-markets at home and assertiveness abroad. But this year the Republicans are left with nothing but a culture war to sell to the voters—Richard Nixon with the redeeming features left out.

And Richard Nixon with the redeeming features left out is pure, unadulterated eeevil.

How Many Sarah Palins Could You Take in a Debate?

John McCain wants to get out of the debate because the nation needs him to ruin the compromise that our leaders in Washington are trying to work out. So since McCain's busy playing politics with the finance system, who should take his place? His second-in-command, of course, who's entirely competent to assume the presidency should McCain finally succumb to jowl cancer.

A blogger at the National Review Online thinks this is a good idea:

Since Obama seems to want to go on with the debate, many readers relay that they'd like McCain to just offer Palin step in for him.

Makes total sense, right? Except for the fact that Palin is apparently Bush in lipstick. Minus the brains. In an interview, Katie Couric asked Palin why we should bail out huge investment banks instead of ordinary Americans.

Here is that segment, including Palin's response:



Whoa, hold on there, Palin. That made absolutely no sense to me. Let's take a look at the transcript and see if we can figure out why:

PALIN: That’s why I say I, like every American I’m speaking with, we're ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it’s got to be about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade — we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation.

Oh! I see--it didn't make sense because it doesn't make any sense! Not only does Palin lack coherent thoughts, she cannot form basic English sentences!

"We're ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it is the taxpayers looking to bailout." Thank you, Miss Teen South Carolina! Excuse me--Miss Wasilla, that is.

And here's another gem: "Reducing taxes...has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans." And then she goes on to say something incoherent about trade.

So, in the spirit of "How Many Five Year Olds Could You Take in a Fight?" I present:

How Many Sarah Palins Could You Take in a Debate?

1. What was your score on the Verbal section of the SAT?
A. Below 500
B. 500-600
C. 600-700
D. 700-800

2. What is your IQ?
A. Below 110.
B. 110-120.
C. 120-130.
D. Over 130.

3. How many colleges will you go to before you get your Bachelor's degree?
A. 4 or more
B. 2-3
C. 1
D. I tested out of college

4. How closely do you follow national and international news?
A. I see it on Fox News occasionally.
B. I see it on CNN between reports about the latest celebrity shenanigans.
C. I read news magazines like Time and Newsweek.
D. I read in-depth analysis from groups like Stratfor, the Economist, and CFR.

5. Have you publicly debated national and international issues before?
A. No.
B. I've argued on the internet or around the water cooler.
C. I was a debater in high school or college.
D. I've debated in the United States Senate.

6. How good are you at forming sentences?
A. Know not I you speak what, Charlie.
B. I can speak okay.
C. I'm fairly eloquent.
D. I'm one of the greatest orators in my generation.

7. Can you answer a direct question?
A. I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
B. Maybe, on occasion.
C. Yes.
D. Not only can I answer a direct question, but I can do so with a sound-bite-worthy one-liner.

Totaling your score:
For every "A," give yourself 0 points. For every "B," give yourself 1 point. For each "C," you get 3, and for each "D," you get 5. That is how many Sarah Palins you could debate at once, and win.

Places I've noticed people proselytizing

I've never lived in the Bible Belt, but the Christians are everywhere:

1. In Jack in the Box
2. Outside the public library
3. At the bus stop
4. Outside a Red Sox game
5. On the radio
6. In the newspaper
7. On television
   
8. At the hospital
9. At the mall
10. At the university
11. At the park
12. At the beach
13. At a Wafflehouse
14. Inside of a public restroom
15. In the toy section in Wal-Mart

Places I've heard a stranger say (s)he was an atheist:

1. The comic book shop
   

Atheism and Happiness

A common argument among religious folk is that regardless of whether their religion is true or not, it makes them feel happy to believe it. The implication is that atheists have no meaning to their lives, and are thus likely to be led towards depression and suicide.

One might say that it's best to live without delusions, no matter how comforting they are. Or you could make Camus' point that one should live with dignity in the face of the absurdity of life. But that still doesn't answer the question--are atheists actually more depressed and suicidal?

This study investigated the link between religiousness and suicidal behavior. The findings?

Religious affiliation is associated with less suicidal behavior in depressed inpatients. After other factors were controlled, it was found that greater moral objections to suicide and lower aggression level in religiously affiliated subjects may function as protective factors against suicide attempts.

This was despite the fact that:

No differences in the level of subjective and objective depression, hopelessness, or stressful life events were found.

So, religious people were no less likely to be depressed, but were less likely to commit suicide if they were, ostensibly because religion teaches that suicide is wrong.

As this site points out:

Social scientists believe that non-belief in God or lack of religiosity are not causitive factors leading to suicide. Rather, it is likely that religious belief that suicide is wrong is a strong deterrent factor that prevents otherwise suicide-prone individuals from committing suicide.

This pattern also seems to hold true in comparison between nations.

A country's suicide rate stands out as the one indicator of societal health in which religious nations fare much better than secular nations.

Studies have also found a positive correlation between happiness and religiousness. As The Economist notes, "sociologists agree that the practice of a faith and broad happiness with life do seem to be related, though nobody has much idea why."

Michael Nielsen suggests three possible explanations:

1. Social Support. Religious involvement is a way of gaining social support. People in general are happier when they are around others who are supportive. Religious groups tend to offer this. This explanation is supported by the fact that the overall pattern of religious people being happier is more pronounced among people who are single, elderly, or in poor health. Related to this is the idea that religion helps people feel closer to God, who might also be viewed as personally supportive.

2. Firm Beliefs. Happiness and life satisfaction increase when we have a sense of where we are going and what is important in life. Of course, many people find this in religion. This might also be related to the rise of 'strict' or conservative churches, which offer more certitude than do more liberal churches.

3. Religion Itself. Religious experiences can be very positive. They offer a person a feeling of being in contact with God (also known as "transcendence") and contact with others. These are usually positive things and, of course, if someone is more involved in positive things, they will tend to feel happier than someone who is less-involved in those things.

So, if religious people are happier, then atheists should be the least happy, right? Incorrect, as this study published in Free Inquiry magazine discovered:

1. The psychological condition of persons who have kept religious beliefs in some form or other depends on the form of their religious education and on their adherence to religious rules, independently of how closely they feel themselves connected with church and religion subjectively—in this regard, the statements of the psychologists of religion cited above are correct, insofar as they speak exclusively of religious persons.

2. They were wrong, however, if they put forth speculative statements—and that in a quite tendentious manner—with regard to the psychic condition of atheists. For, as our study proves, a person who underwent religious socialization and then had the courage and clear mind to break with religion and church later on has the best chance to live a happier life than any Christian under statistically comparable conditions. Apart from an atheist attitude that is based on reason, this requires a clear analysis and understanding of one’s own past in regard to religion.

Based on my quick survey of available information, I think I can draw the following conclusions:

• Religion can provide certain components of a happy life, but these components are attainable outside of religion.
  
• Atheists should not dismiss the positive social effects of religion. We should instead seek to replicate these effects in a secular context.
  
• Rather than simply exhorting people to give up their religion, we should demonstrate how it is possible to live a happy, meaningful life as an atheist.
• Finally it is important to note that personal belief is not the most important variable correlated with happiness. As this article finds, "a nation's level of happiness was most closely associated with health levels (correlation of .62), followed by wealth (.52), and then provision of education (.51)"

Lack of Fear Itself

Franklin Roosevelt said in his inaugural address, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Today, we have the opposite problem: What we have to fear is the lack of fear. We live in a time of relative peace and prosperity. Gone is the threat of plague, famine, and pestilence. Gone are the days when commies hid in our closets and we were ready to curl up under our desks should a nuclear missile fall from the sky. People no longer live with the knowledge that existence as we know it could end like *that* any moment, of any day, of any year.

According to Sigmund Freud, fear is the greatest human motivational factor, along with fecal obsessions and the desire of children to marry their parents. So if we remove fear, what does that leave us with?

Apathy.

Apathy to the moral decay that is eating our society from the inside out.

Our youth, raised in an society devoid of fear, are increasingly being corrupted by negative influences. Not the least of these is video games, which promote violence and immoral behavior. In one such 'game,' players direct innocent frogs onto a busy highway, where they are often crushed to death. In another, they take on the role of a corpulent yellow man who gormandizes all in his path. Only recently have experts begun to document the soul-destroying effects of this demented form of entertainment, but evidence of its repercussions is distressingly easy to find. In one tragic case, a boy played multiple video games at a local arcade. Only two years later, he robbed a liquor store. Scenarios like this are being played out right now, all across the nation.

Recently overshadowed by video games but no less sinister is the game "Dungeons and Dragons." In this game and others like it, players spend hours at a time rolling funnily shaped dice and debating whether or not a particular clause in the 900 pages of rules warrants an experience point bonus for headbutting an orc into a pit of lava. Clearly, these games are teaching our youth to be nerds, which is the first step towards cult activities and Satan-worship. Furthermore, studies show that those who play these games exercise critical thinking skills and creativity, and have, on average, better performance in school. This in turn decreases their ignorance and irrational fear, further compounding the existing problem.

Examples of this moral corruption are too vast in number to enumerate here. Suffice it to say that it has not stopped at entertainment, popular culture, and fashion. It has reached even our political system. In a recent Zogby International study, a vast majority of the youth polled stated that a political candidate's physical appearance did not matter in deciding their vote. Furthermore, virtually all of the respondents placed great importance on "issues." Sometime in the near future, we might elect an ugly president, simply because a majority of Americans agree with his or her policies. And that is unacceptable. It would undermine the basis of the modern political system.

And the moral decay will not stop there. It will destroy--it is destroying--everything we hold near and dear. Ben and Jerry's just discontinued their "Chunky Monkey" flavor of ice cream. I ask you, is nothing sacred?

While most of our country remains impassive towards our lack-of-fear crisis, some have made noble efforts to turn back the tide.

Under the Bush administration, the federal government has finally taken steps to remedy the problem. When September 11 created a surge in fear, the government seized the opportunity. They created color-coded terror charts. They warned us to lock our doors, trust no one, and report any suspicious activities to the authorities. At last recognizing the fear vacuum created by the collapse of the Soviet Union, they searched desperately for a big bad evil guy to fill the Evil Empire's former position.

Sadly, these efforts proved to be too little, too late. The newly created Axis of Evil was split apart by internal divisions, as two of the member nations were bitter enemies and had fought a bloody, eight-year war against each other, and the third was in an entirely different part of the world. Even the terrorists largely failed to deliver, and fear levels are again on the decline. It goes to show that it's a poor idea to outsource our fear-mongering.

Many have turned to religion to fill the gap where the government has failed. Unfortunately, many misguided people are now insisting on literal interpretations of the passages in the Bible about love and compassion. Previously, religious thinkers had recognized that these statements were metaphors, and that while Jesus said to love thy neighbor as thyself, he in fact was demanding constant fear of different cultures, different people, different ideas, and above all, fear of eternal damnation. But bending to the pressures of our morally bankrupt culture, revisionist theologians are now curbing the fear-inducing effects of Christianity. In addition, Christianity itself is declining in influence, as many Americans now belong to non-Christian religions, such as the Methodists and the Unitarians.

Thus, it might seem that our nation has an insoluble predicament. This lack of fear threatens to bleed away our values, corrupt our youth, and destroy our society. All efforts to heal this wound have proven insufficient.

But fear not. There is a solution: We must summon the Great Cthulhu--who lies dreaming beneath the ocean in R'lyeh, whose scaly, cyclopean frame is adorned with flabby claws and bat-like wings, whose numerous feelers writhe from a squid-like head, who drives men mad even in dreams...Yes, bring back the Great Cthulhu, and we shall never want for fear again.

My high school's newspaper is terrible

I was so disappointed by the quality of my school's latest newspaper that I wrote a letter of complaint. I doubt that it'll get printed, but it was cathartic. Here it is:

Effective communication skills are important, and nowhere are they more crucial than in journalism. Thus, I was disappointed to see that the latest issue of the school newspaper committed atrocities against the English language so egregious that they likely warrant U.N. sanctions.

Many of the articles were filled with grammar, punctuation, and usage errors. One article used repetitious redundancies that reiterated the same thing over and over again. Another confused the word "eminent" with "imminent," in the midst of citing a wholly irrelevant piece of trivia (the word "trivia," by the way, comes from the fact that in ancient Rome, inconsequential pieces of information were posted at the intersection of three roads; hence "tri," meaning "three," and "via," meaning "road"). "Its" and "it's" were confused on multiple occasions.

Furthermore, the formatting was inconsistent. Some of the articles were left-aligned, while others were justified. The typeset was in varying sizes. In some places, the spacing was markedly bizarre, such as the "h" and the "e" of the word "he" appearing two centimeters apart.

I realize that it is unfair to hold individual writers accountable for their tenuous grasp on the mechanics of the English language, especially in a high school publication. However, the editors are responsible for proofreading the articles and maintaining a degree of quality control over what gets printed. Remember: The honor of my school is mine. When the newspaper suggests that "at" and "the" should be written as a single word, "atthe," it dishonors all of us.

Sincerely,
Eliot St. John

Long Words

Every so often I'll say something to someone in normal conversation and they'll respond by saying, "Whoa, man. Stop using long words!" This really bugs me, especially since half the time I don't know what exactly I said that confused them. I try to rephrase what I meant in simpler terms, but they're usually not interested. This leads me to believe that people are simply pretending to be confused by my vocabulary and using it as a pretext for breaking off the conversation. From now on, I'll just say, "What, is my sesquipedalian verbiage overwhelming your lilliputian brain?"