The failure of organized religion in the world.

I think this picture summerizes very neatly the reasons why organized religion and particularly 'modern' Christianity is slowly but surely losing its grip on influencing society.

This isn't to say it'll disappear anytime soon. The one thing people who have power fear most, is losing it.

Maybe the reason there is such a decline in attendance, is that people (particularly younger people) have long figured out that these religious leaders cannot 1) even remember their own teachings, and that 2) they cannot adapt to a changing world.

Think I'm being cruel? One of this place's recent signs said 'Forgive your enemies. Nothing irritates them more.'

To me, most religions today are in 'broken telephone' mode. While many of them had teachings and things that people can learn, that knowledge has been transferred so many times through so many generations, that's its meanings are largely lost.

Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 ...

... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/09/obama-nobel-speech-video_n_315324.html

 

Funny how this messes up the American Right-wing pretend-world they've created for themselves in cable news and traditional media.

 

What's clear is that the American Right-Wing do not react to reality or the real world very well.

 

This comment sums up the right-wing perfectly -

 

"John Bolton and his Republican crackpots who cannot be civil to our Commander In Chief remind me of cow pancakes in the pasture. The pancakes only stink when stepped on; otherwise they dry up and blow away as fertilizer."

 

At some point, if you try to engage with people who harbor views that are virtually absent of reality, all one ends up doing is getting dirty. Best to acknowledge what they say and move on.

 

Think it's just the right-wing? Check the long-discredited Time Magazine -

 

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200910090031

Rocket Robin Hood finally coming to a store near you!

Yay!

http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/news/Rocket-Robin-Hood-New-Release-Date/12783

After a nearly two-year lull, it's good to finally see this is coming out.

At minimum, it's my hope that the release will be in the same style as the '67 Spider-Man TV Series issued on DVD.

UPDATE - oh the never-ending confusion -

http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/news/Rocket-Robin-Hood-Volume-1/12794

Argh! No wonder it's cheaper. Perhaps it's not all the episodes. Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

What does health-care reform mean in the United States?

Here's Michael Moore's view -

 

1. No cost controls on insurance companies. The coming sharp increases in premiums, deductibles, co-pays, co-insurance, etc. will quickly outpace any projected protections from caps on out-of-pocket costs.

2. Insurance companies will continue to be able to use marketing techniques to cherry-pick healthier, less costly enrollees.

3. No restrictions on insurance denials of care that insurers don't want to pay for.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moore/why-the-current-bills-don_b_302483.html.

Walmart appears to support this reform - now I know why.

It's always amusing to read online the opinions of people in the US who believe oppose a single-payer or national health care system for all; that it is somehow socialism. Have these people ever experienced living in one of those countries, or raising a family there? Well I've done the former, and would gladly prefer a system like Canada or Switzerland here.

The stories one never hears about ...

Seem outlandish?

Not true?

Big shock?

Even bigger shock?

Read about it here - http://wweek.com/editorial/3547/13109/ and decide for yourself.

 

Read more here  - http://www.projectcensored.org

 

'The Politico' - Stenographers for the GOP.

There are a lot of good liberal, progressive, and left-of-center policy- and research centers out on the web today (one of the best is the Center for Media and Democracy). It's a far cry from how it was 10 years ago. There are also great discussion forums like Daily Kos and MyDD that continue to offer debate on issues of the day.

 

And I'm all for having opinions that differ, existing in these environments. I think it's very important that differing viewpoints (be they liberal, conservative, or otherwise) be evaluated and the most logical, reasonable, intelligent, and forward-thinking ideas should prevail in any kind of debate.

 

I find such things don't really exist within most Conservative counterparts. I find they also largely don't exist in most mainstream media (hence the existance of Media Matters). There are no real debates - just lots of talking points and trolling. Of course talking points are all one has when one doesn't have any real arguments.

 

But real discussion of issues isn't very appealing to do where there isn't any real debate, like most conservative outlets. So often such viewpoints and trolls end up in more non-conservative sites. I find that's done to really poison the public debate going on elsewhere, or to really derail debate altogether.

 

But right-wingers also know that's not the only way to derail public debate. They have their own pretend mediums - like cable news.

 

But contrary to what many may think - I don't believe Faux News is the propoganda arm of the Republican Party. Their audience consists of conservatives, right-wingers, libertarians, and various other groups and such, so they appeal to them. In a sense, they are entertaining their audience, in order to sell their sponsors' products. This should come as no surprise in that Faux News is owned by a large entertainment media congomerate.

 

(Hey, by that argument, aren't pretty much all major networks owned by large entertainment conglomerates?)

 

By the same argument, I don't consider Rush Limbaugh the de-facto head of any political party. He's an entertainer, his audience is mostly conservative and right-wing. He's saying whatever sells his sponsors's products the most to his audience.

 

'The Politco' is a different story.

 

Exhibit A - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/ipoliticois-thrush-apolog_n_296585.html

 

"Thrush was handed a truncated quote that came bundled with an official statement from the NRCC, which Thrush included in his original report. There should have been a moment, prior to publication, where Thrush questioned the neatly wrapped gift he received from this party operative."

 

Indeed. A real journalist would've questioned what was given and verified the data was accurate.

 

Hence 'The Politico' is not - and never was - journalism. Unlike Faux and Rush, I consider them a publisher of the American Republican Party spin. Their entire existence came about from various right-wing sources - read Glenn Greenwald's Politico origins.

 

(Check this out for a more recent Politco takedown - courtesy Mr. Greenwald).

 

Any person or persons using Politco as a source of anything is diluting their own credibility in a debate, or otherwise.

 

The Obama Healthcare plan ...

   ... in 4 minutes.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/9/21/784906/-Pass-it-on:-President-Obamas-HealthCare-Plan-in-4-Minutes

 

While I'm happy that there is a public health care option, I wish it wouldn't just be restricted to those who don't have coverage, or for those who are changing jobs or starting a new business.

 

Lots of people have crappy insurance through their employer and pay up the nose every month.

 

But still, I'm glad it's there.