Funding Education

One of the more interesting games I have found on Facebook is called Nations. It allows you to create a fictitious country in which you are dictator of the country. Each day you are presented with two questions. Your options are to pick one of the three or four pre-created answers or dismiss the question. Your countries criteria on a dozen or so different factors may be effected and an outcome of your decision is listed.

At first I thought the game had a decidedly liberal slant. The longer I've played though the more I see is as just simply having an under-educated, popular opinion slant, which is itself sometimes liberal. Here is one such example of a question that doesn't have a good answer like privatize schooling.

A new worldwide study on literacy was released today placing your country in the bottom 10%. Do you:

	Increase funding to public schools and offer tax breaks to adults who attend literacy programs at local colleges.
	Enforce mandatory literacy tests? Find those who are dragging your score down and hold mass executions as an example to those who are considering not learning to read.
	Reading isn't necessary! What does reading have to do with making name brand shoes or nuts and bolts.

Based on my previous experience with the game, the "good" answer is the first one. This follows the popular thinking that increased funding solves education problems. Funding may account for why one county has better teachers than a nearby county, but in general funding only influences education in extreme cases such as a complete lack of textbooks.

If I were writing these answers my answer would be something like the following:

	Start a program to gradually privatize schools. In the meantime mandate look-say be replaced with phonics and stop promoting children to the next grade who have not met the grades reading requirements.

As I expected I selected option one and got the following result:

• The overwhelming success of Xeamland's (the name of my country) new literacy program has sparked the once untapped printing and binding industries.

We Three Kings

We Three Kings is a great Christmas carol by John Henry Hopkins, Jr. It's a pity that we only sing the first and last verses because each verse is good. I particularly like verse three because it makes verse four all the more meaningful. Here is the entire song.

Verse 1

We three kings of Orient are

Bearing gifts we traverse afar.

Field and fountain, moor and mountain,

Following yonder star.

Refrain

O star of wonder, star of night,

Star with royal beauty bright,

Westward leading, still proceeding,

Guide us to thy perfect Light.

Born a king on Bethlehem's plain,

Gold I bring to crown Him again,

King forever, ceasing never

Over us all to reign.

Verse 2

Frankincense to offer have I.

Incense owns a Deity nigh.

Prayer and praising, all men raising,

Worship Him, God most high.

Verse 3

Myrrh is mine: Its bitter perfume

Breathes a life of gathering gloom.

Sorrowing, sighing, bleeding dying,

Sealed in the stone-cold tomb.

Verse 4

Glorious now behold Him arise,

King and God and Sacrifice.

Alleluia, alleluia!

Earth to the heaven replies.

Who Gets Your Money

This is an Orangutan we saw at the Gulf Breeze Zoo. He was being fed green beans and had his hand out for more. Remind you of any US automakers? I suppose I think better of the orangutan because he isn't at fault for his situation. Of course I'm not sure I'll think any better of a congressman who votes to give a large company money in hard times by taking it from small companies and individuals (and their children) through taxes and a higher deficit.

Voting Tax

Wikipedia's article on Poll tax says among other things, "...a tax formerly required for voting in parts of the United States that was often designed to disenfranchise poor people...".  It also lists state identification cards to prevent voter fraud as a potential poll tax of sorts.  Even those states that provide free identification cards are suspect because traveling to the government office can be prohibitive for the homeless and because there may be a cost to acquire the documents needed for identification.

I'm not sure I've come to a firm conclusion on a poll tax.  I know I don't believe we should institute an Oligarchy.  You could have a good oligarchy for a time, but it would become corrupt sooner rather than later.  On the other hand I'm not sure a small barrier to the privilege of voting would be a bad thing.  Think about it; do we really want to be bending over backwards so that people who refuse to work a few hours at minimum wage can help decide the course of government?

If we don't require voters to be verified before they vote (as we often don't here in the states) voter fraud will increase regardless of any federal penalties.  A small fee would not have the privacy concerns (which I don't necessarily agree with) that an identification card would have, but it would have a similar effect of keeping would be repeat voters from voting again.  Some would say this would only prevent this type of fraud for the poor, but since each individual only gets one vote anyway a wealthier person committing this fraud would be easier to catch as they pass out the poll tax funds.  Of course this is the situation we are already in to some extent as the wealthy finance rides to voting locations for those they want to vote a particular way.  This is not illegal even though it has the same effect.

Of course a poll tax is by no means a cure all.  A poll tax would be a minor impediment to an electorate that sees no problem in using their 60% vote to take income from the 40% that are wealthier.  Of course this doesn't change either the 40% or 60% in relation to one another it just lowers them both, but that's another topic.

Perhaps the poll tax should be directly tied to the cost of the election.  Citizens are paying for the election indirectly now, so why not pay for it directly.  Normally I am against any new tax proposals, but in this case I'll make an exception.  A tax tied directly to the benefit would be equitable, voluntary, and simple.  It would be interesting to see what would happen if a state re-instated a poll tax.

India and Pakistan Standoff

This is a humorous bit on the "volatile" India/Pakistan standoff.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/volatile_india_pakistan_standoff

A persistent demand to be met is bound

In Level 7 by Mordecai Roshwald, a fiction book with a political point that I do not necessarily recommend, there is a quote in appendix B that I found interesting.  Appendix B is two chapters from a novel the author wrote that was never published.  In this section there is said to be a proverb.  The proverb is, "A persistent demand to be met is bound,".  I found this interesting because that is all there is to the quote.  My mind completed the thought and added ...to be met, but then the quote is saying that I would do so.  But, then the quote would not have made sense if I had not completed the thought, but then it wouldn't have said I would have if I hadn't...

What kind of blogger am I?

Typealyzer defines my blogging style as follows:

The organizing and efficient type. They are especially attuned to setting goals and managing available resources to get the job done. Once they´ve made up their mind on something, it can be quite difficult to convince otherwise. They listen to hard facts and can have a hard time accepting new or innovative ways of doing things.

The Guardians are often happy working in highly structured work environments where everyone knows the rules of the job. They respect authority and are loyal team players.

Ark Replica

Johan Huibers in the Netherlands has built a scale replica of the Ark. I received an email forward that said it used the "exact scale given in Bible". It is neat to see someone who takes Genesis literally and wants to promote knowledge of the gospel through this means, but there is a few statement on his website that could cause confusion even before the media comes in and enhances the confusion with their own misconceptions.

The builders website says "The original Ark was 140 cubits long, and 23 cubits wide and 14 cubits high, This Ark is 70 cubits long, 9,5 cubits wide and nearly 13 cubits high". Breaking this down we have the following:

140 x 23 x 14 = 45,080 cubic cubits - Actual?
70 x 9.5 x 13 = 8,645 cubic cubits - Replica

By these dimensions the replica is 19.18% as large as the original or about 1/5 as large. Of course the dimensions are distorted. The replica is about 5/10 as long, 4/10 as wide and 9/10 as high. This certainly could lead to some misconceptions. It seems like it could have at least been made 1/2 as large for all dimensions, not just the length. That would have made for a vessel 70 x 11.5 x 7. Perhaps these dimensions weren't as usable for his purposes.

Of course if you look at the builder's blog about the full size replica they are working on, that one will be 153.2 yards long x 27.35 yards wide x 19.7 yards high using an 18.4 inch per cubit relationship (18 inches is typically used). Reversing those dimensions using their size for a cubit we get the following dimensions for the original ark:

300 x 54 x 39 = 631,800 cubic cubits

But wait a minute, did the original ark really have those dimensions? We don't have to guess or suppose about the cubits. The scripture says in Genesis 6:14-16 that "...The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits and its height thirty cubits." Those dimensions yield the following:

300 x 50 x 30 = 450,000 cubic cubits

Perhaps the differences between the actual and this second reconstruction are due to the limitations of the barges being used to construct the second replica, but that still doesn't explain the first. Here is a side by side comparison of the first replica and the actual ark:

300 x 50.0 x 30 = 450,000 cubic cubits - biblical dimensions
70 x 9.5 x 13 = 8,645 cubic cubits - Replica

So the replica is 23/100 as long, 19/100 as wide, 43/100 as tall and only has 2% of the volume of the original. I don't see any way the replica could be considered 1/2 as large as the original, but 1/5 doesn't seem quite right either. Averaging the ratios to the originals gives an average ratio of 28/100, which is 7/25 somewhere between 1/3 and 1/4 the size of the original. Perhaps I'm too much of a stickler for accuracy, and perhaps the good being done by this project is not hindered by these discrepancies. I certainly hope that this is the case. In any case at least the full size replica has closer to the correct proportions.

Because He Lives

The combination of having a new baby and the election of Barack Obama as President makes the second verse of Because He Lives all the more applicable.

How sweet to hold a newborn baby,

And feel the pride and joy he gives;

But greater still the calm assurance:

This child can face uncertain days because He Lives!

The American's Creed

I believe in the United States of America as a government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed, a democracy in a republic, a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States; a perfect union, one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.

I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies.

–Written 1917 by William Tyler Page, accepted by the United States House of Representatives on April 3, 1918 as the official creed of America.

Praying for President Elect Obama

I will be praying for president elect Obama not just because we are commanded to pray for him in I Timothy 2.

I exhort therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

In addition I will be praying for him because I care about my future, my kids future, and the future of my country.  My prayer however, will be different than my prayer is for President Bush.  For Bush I prayed that he would strengthen legal immigration by stopping illegal, that he would treat Chinese Communists the same way he treats North Korean Communists, and that he would would not support socialism through welfare, deficit spending, and bailouts of failing companies. 

For Obama I will pray for a 180 degree turn in everything he stands for and plans to do.  If and until that happens I will pray that his purposes will be confounded, that his term will only be four years, and that Americans will see the mistake we made.

Don't Just Vote, Vote Responsibly

As I said in my last post, our responsibility is to vote responsibly not just vote. Here are several things I meant by that.

1. Vote for a candidate who has a chance of winning otherwise you are not voting. By chance I mean the following:
a. They meet the technical qualifications.
b. They are on the ballot in sufficient places to be able to win.
c. They have a chance of winning. By chance I don't mean the media's definition in which they have to be polling within 10% more like 20%.
2. Make an informed vote, one that understands the record of the individual not just what they say.

Pointless Encouragement to Vote

Today I received an email from the Facebook administrator for the cause "Keep God In Schools!".  Here is the email

I don't like to be one to mix the pulpit with politics so I'm going to
get straight to the point. The creator of the Causes application of
facebook has emailed all the creators of the largest causes on facebook
and has asked them to post announcements reminding their members of the
election coming up this tuesday.


So, I'm going to do just that. The election is coming up and
everyone who has not voted is encouraged to do so for who ever they
choose to support.


Thats all I'm going to say and this message was not meant to
endorse any political candidate, figure, affiliation at all. It was
simply a reminded to exercise your God given right to vote.

What struck me about this was that given a perfect opportunity for him to promote the better candidates for supporting his cause, he doesn't support anyone and yet still encourages them to vote.  It seems we need a greater appeal to vote for candidates that best represent our beliefs.  I would also add that if you don't know where a candidate stands then you ought not vote for them at all.  Our responsibility is to vote responsibly not just vote.

What is the difference between Obama and a Marxist?

On pages 100 to 101 of Obama's book "Dreams From My Father" he says,

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully, the more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.

Today I found this great article by Benjamin Shapiro here is an excerpt.

---

He cites as his economic guru Warren Buffett and quotes him as
stating, "[Billionaires] have this idea that it's 'their money' and
they deserve to keep every penny of it. What they don't factor in is
all the public investment that lets us live the way we do." (191) This
is Marxist trash. "Capital is therefore not a personal, it is a social
power," Marx wrote in "The Communist Manifesto." Viewing private
property as social property is a mandate to tyranny. Yet that's
precisely how Obama views private property: "I simply believe that
those of us who have benefited most from this new economy can best
afford to shoulder the obligation of ensuring every American child has
a chance for that same success." (193)

These are not the words of a moderate. They are the words of a
man who fits right in with his radical base. The hatred for Reagan,
Bush and, in particular, the revulsion he feels at traditional
religion, is palpable. Those who endorse Obama must look beyond his
fraudulent rhetoric before signing off on his agenda.

---

What went wrong with the 2008 Republican primary?

The basic problem in the 2008 Republican primary was the number of more conservative candidates compared to the number of more liberal candidates.  Paul, Huckabee, Romney, and Thompson were basically competing for the conservative vote while McCain was competing for the liberal Republican vote.  Giuliani was for the social liberal vote as well, but not until the Florida primary which we all saw was too late to get in the game.

McCain talks about the clear choice he is over Obama.  While that is true, he is hardly the clear choice that any of the more conservative candidates were.  If Republicans would have paid more attention during the primary this all could have been prevented and we could have had a better choice in the Republican candidate.  A choice that would have excited the base like Sarah Palin did.

Failure Highlights

1. Romney out spent Huckabee in Iowa 20 to 1 spending around $85,000 a day some of which was negative campaigning against Huckabee.  Message trumps money and the people of Iowa saw that.  Huckabee took 30 delegates while Romney only took 7.  This should have been a clear indication to conservatives that Romney was not the best candidate.  They should have seen it before, but prominent conservatives such as Dobson, Hannity, and Limbaugh should have seen this, realized their mistake and changed their message.  Instead they each held out against Huckabee, if not directly at least indirectly.

2. After Iowa there were two victories for McCain and one small victory for Romney, so that before the 1/19/2008 primaries McCain had 31 delegates, Romney had 19, Huckabee had 35 and the remainder had zero.  Despite these facts even the conservative media spent most of their time talking about McCain, Romney, Thompson, Giuliani, and even Ron Paul.

3. The South Carolina primary saw the broadest competition in the primary.  By the end of the day the spread went McCain-33.2, Romney 15.1, Huckabee-29.9, Thompson-15.7, Paul-3.7, and Giuliani-2.1.  Eliminating the not so conservative McCain and Giuliani there was still 64.4% conservative vote in the state.  OK, we can probably eliminate half of Paul's votes because they are voting for making all drugs legal or side with the Democrats in wanting to abandon our troops in harms way.  Still that leaves more than 62%.  Of course Huckabee wouldn't have needed any of Paul's votes.  If either Romney or Thompson had realized that they didn't have the chance and only half of their votes went to Huckabee he would have won by 4.2 with Romney out or 4.8 with Thompson out.  Even if Paul who was polling at 5% in South Carolina and had only garnered 9.9% in Iowa, 7.7% in New Hampshire, and 6.3% in Michigan had pulled out and put his full support behind Huckabee, it might have been just enough for him to beat McCain by .4%.  Not exactly an astounding victory, but a victory none the less.

As an aside, there are times when polling is off.  For example, in the instance just listed Ron Paul polled at 5% in South Carolina but only garnered 3.7% of the vote.  On super Tuesday in Georgia Huckabee was polling at 26%, but when the dust had settled he drew 34% of the vote an 8% difference.  This race was another one in which Paul's polls were higher than the actual votes.  McCain's polls on the other hand were only 0.2% off of his final draw for Georgia showing that he wasn't really in the contest for the conservative vote accounting for the excitement of the Palin addition.  Can you imagine the excitement in the base if a true conservative were the choice from the start.

Obama Marx 08

Clear Choice For President

No, the choice this election for president isn't as clear as a Huckabee/Obama contrast would have been, but the choice is still clear. Here is another forwarded email I received showing some of the clear differences between John McCain and Barack Obama.

ISSUE		JOHN McCAIN	BARAK OBAMA
Favors new drilling offshore US		Yes	No
Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it		Yes	No
Served in the US Armed Forces		Yes	No
Amount of time served in the US Senate		22 YEARS	173 DAYS
Will institute a socialized national health care plan		No	Yes
Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy		No	Yes
Would pull troops out of Iraq immediately		No	Yes
Supports gun ownership rights		Yes	No
Supports homosexual marriage		No	Yes
Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase		No	Yes
Voted against making English the official language		No	Yes
Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals		No	Yes
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
MCCAIN	0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
OBAMA	28% on profit from ALL home sales. (How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.)
DIVIDEND TAX
MCCAIN	15% (no change)
OBAMA	39.6% - (How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.')
INCOME TAX
MCCAIN (no changes)	Single making 30K - tax $4,500 Single making 50K - tax $12,500 Single making 75K - tax $18,750 Married making 60K- tax $9,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)	Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!
INHERITANCE TAX
MCCAIN	- 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA	Restore the inheritance tax Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.
NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA
New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet. New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already) New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity) New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!

You can verify the above at the following web sites:

http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/election/2008/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.taxes.html

http://elections.foxnews.com/?s=proposed+taxes

http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourworld/politics/articles/mccain_obama_offer_different_visions_on_taxes.html

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/candidates/barack_obama/

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/candidates/john_mccain/

What I Learned From the Media About Sarah Palin

I don't like chain emails, but I don't mind posting one to a blog from time to time.  Here's one I received today.

1. From the media   -  I learned Sarah Palin's husband has a DUI conviction from 22 years ago.

On my own  -  I learned that Ted Kennedy (hero at the DNC) was drunk while driving a car off a bridge in Chappaquiddick. That same crash killed a young campaign volunteer with whom he was having an affair. Oh, and that woman was pregnant with his child.

Mr. Palin's  - (who is not running for office) DUI came a mere 4 years after Barack Obama (who is running for president) stopped using cocaine and marijuana (by his own admission in his autobiography).

Shocking - it's OK for the presidential candidate to use drugs or the party patriarch to kill someone while driving drunk yet the husband of a VP candidate should be demonized for something done 22 years ago.

2. From the media -   I learned that Sarah Palin's daughter is pregnant.

On my own  -  I learned that Joe Biden's (the other VP candidate) son was paid a large amount of money as a consultant to credit card company MBNA. That same company had business before Senator Joe Biden concerning regulation of consumer credit practices.  After the company paid a hefty sum to Mr. Biden's son, he voted in favor of legislation to help that company.

That same son, Hunter, is also engaged in a legal investigation and suit for defrauding a former business
partner

Shocking - it's a crime for the republican VP candidate to have a child who's pregnant even though it's irrelevant to how she performs her job.
It's ok, however, for the democrat VP candidate while a senator to vote in favor of a company who paid his son over a quarter of a million dollars.

3. From the media  - I learned that Sarah Palin should be considered 'selfish' for agreeing to run for VP knowing about her daughter's condition.  Knowing that her public role would bring extra scrutiny on the family is selfish and she should have declined to protect her child (actually heard this on ABC)

Strange - the same people who said Sarah is selfish for running for VP did not seem to care about any impact on Chelsea when Bill Clinton had his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. That was a private, personal matter you see.

4.From the media  -  I have learned to be 'concerned' that Sarah Palin probably won't be able to manage her family and do an effective job of being VP at the same time.

Funny - I never heard anything about Hillary's ability to support Chelsea while re-doing healthcare or any of the other feminist icons who say you can balance work and family. They also never mention that Barack will have to balance time with his children while meeting with heads of rogue nations or how Joe Biden's kids don't even have a mom and will be fighting for his time while he hosts white house coffee fundraisers and sells nights in the Lincoln bedroom.

5. From the media  -  I have learned that Sarah Palin is 'too inexperienced' to be a heartbeat-away from the presidency.

Apparently taking on corruption in your own party and running a state that's the same size people-wise as Delaware (hint hint: that's where Joe Biden is from) is not really experience.

However, time spent as a 'community organizer' and less than 180 days in the senate where you've authored no significant legislation is just the type of 'change' we're looking for from the top of the ticket.

Funny - inexperience at the top of the ticket is a mantra for 'change' and 'hope' while strong practical everyday experience as the number two is cause for concern.

6. From the media  -  I learned that Sarah Palin's husband once got a ticket for fishing without a license.

I haven't heard much about the fact that if he were still a practicing attorney, the VP candidate Joe Biden would be disbarred for plagiarism not once but multiple times.

It's ok to break the rules if you're a democrat candidate but not Ok if you are the spouse of a republican candidate.

7. From the media  - I learned that Sarah Palin doesn't know much about Iraq ; in fact we wonder if she even knows where it is.

Sarah's son volunteered into the US military and is now deployed in Iraq .  I guess that doesn't count.

Sarah has spent more time with troops in Iraq (as commander of the Alaska National Guard she visited Kuwait last year) than Obama has even while running for president. In fact, when Sarah went to Iraq she spent time with the troops.  When Obama went there, he skipped a base visit to instead go work out at the Ritz Carlton .

8. From the media  - I learned that Sarah Palin is a 'lightweight' and she better be a 'quick study' to keep up with this team.

Funny, nobody is talking about how, after Barack Obama had 'visited 57 states' according to him he only had '5 more to go' or endless other stupid gaffes that expose who he really is.

9. From the media  - I have learned that (gasp!), Sarah Palin's husband was once a registered member of a 3rd party that favored states' rights (man, this is really bad stuff).

That same media has been silent to the story that when Barack Obama announced his first senate run, he did so in the home of William Ayers.   Mr. Ayers is an un-repentant terrorist convicted for bombing the pentagon.  This same Mr. Ayers said on 9/11 that he and his group did not do enough to harm our military and he wished he had done more.
During the same time as that comment, he was serving on a board with Barack Obama.  All notes and information about their serving together is now locked up by the corrupt Chicago machine and reporter access to those records are being blocked by the Obama campaign.

Pray More

Tonight in church we were challenged by Dr. Don Smith to spend 15 minutes to one hour extra a day in prayer for the upcoming election.  I didn't commit to those times because I'm not sure I can do it, but I do see the need and I will strive to increase my prayer time about the election. 

GetDropBox

GetDropBox is an application that uses the internet to keep a specific folder synchronized and versioned between multiple computers. I haven't used it, but it looks interesting. The beta provides 2 GB of space with free version.

Questions for Candidates

At http://moderator.appspot.com Google allows people to make suggestions for questions to ask the presidential candidates and questions from others can be voted up or down. I didn't expect much, but while many questions weren't very good, some were. Even some that weren't good questions were interesting for other reasons. I killed several minutes voting up questions I liked and down ones I didn't.

Here are some of the interesting ones in the for Barack Obama category:

"In his presidential bid Joe Biden placed fifth in the Iowa caucuses, much higher than the majority of US citizens, but still garnering less than one percent of the delegates. Do you foresee Biden voters providing a bump, and if so, how will you know?"

"What kind of Government data RSS feeds can we expect to come out of your administration?"

"Why is everyone afraid to say your full name?"

"What three cabinet-level departments can the country do without?"

"Exactly why are you against drilling in ANWR at this point?"

"Please explain how the inclusion on your campaign committee of the former three top executives of Fannie Mae, who were fired for allowing this mess to occur on their watch, squares with your call for change in Washington."

Presidential Debate 2 on 1

Just read this article on the moderator bias in the Palin-Biden debate. It was interesting to see someone delineate the bias I see pouring out on almost every presidential debate that takes place including this one.

The Commission on Presidential Debates that has organized the presidential debates since 1987 is technically a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3), but like every organization they are as bias as their members and sponsors. They posted their 2008 sponsors as follows:

Anheuser-Busch Companies
BBH New York
The Howard G. Buffet Foundation
Sheldon S. Cohen, Esq.
EDS, an HP Company
International Bottled Water Association
The Kovler Fund
YWCA USA

I didn't see anything about how the moderators are choosen, nor did I see any indication of how much influence the candiates have over the selection. In any case it seems to me that conservatives should do something to keep these debates from being a two on one match.

Joe Biden the Conservative

It is interesting to me that during an election cycle liberals paint themselves very much like conservatives. While conservatives do somewhat lean toward the left as well, the difference in how much is striking. Liberals go so far as to starkly contradict their own voting record.

Take the recent vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin. Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

Biden said McCain weakened regulation on Fannie May and Freddie Mac, but he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie institutions supported strongly by librerals and that fund liberal campaigns.

Finally, Biden said he has always been for clean coal, but his voting record shows that he consistently votes against clean coal.

There are a few issues such as abortion where a liberal does not try act entirely like a conservative. Perhaps these are issues that feel the strongest on or perhaps realize they can't hide their opinion, but on matters such as taxes and energy I think liberals realize that being for higher taxes and against sound energy policy will never be politically viable.

Is Worthy?

This blog started as a question from by brother Michael about the difference between Facebook and a blog. In explaining them to him I discovered that he was more interested in a blog than in a Facebook account for his missionary deputation. Finding that necessitated that I find somewhere for him to put a blog, which led me here.

I had actually thought about blogging before this, but didn't think I'd have the time. I'm still not sure.

Naming the blog was the first challenge. I wanted something short, but interesting. After considering several things along the lines of Christianity, conservatism, computers, and such I finally landed on Is Worthy.

It somewhat sounds like a name for a programming function, so that gets the computer angle in. It is a biblical reference from Revelation 5:1-5 that refers to Jesus Christ as the only one found worthy. It also is a general question that could be applied to anything as in "Is this worthy of my time", "Is this a worthwile activity", "Is this worth the cost?". These are questions we should be asking about everything we do.