Monday music: "Il Silenzio"

As the MM's have been lighter in tone lately, here's some cultcha:

(Thanks to reader Ralph Traylor for the tip)

Hither and thither 5/28/10

Again with the busy week, yet again with the borgaschmord for you, Dear Readers. Enjoy! And, fellow- Americans — remember the price of our national freedom, initial and ongoing.

• Tone-deaf as usual to many Americans in general and to the military in particular, President Obama will be doing what few previous presidents have done: missing the commemoration of Memorial Day at Arlington. (Thanks to Gil for the link.)
• Good news/bad news. On the one hand, WalMart is selling 16GB 3GS iPhones for $97. On the other hand... well, check out the name of their senior category director for wireless.
• Now share with me an Om Nom Nom Moment:

• Staying with the noms, BSIL saw a cool way to "force" some cookies to be even cooler.

• Remaining with that theme, reader Mark Loftus found a bunch of cool Death Stars (or the like).
• And again, reader JTW shows us what Darth Vader really sounded like at first.
• Sidling slowly away from the theme, for those who like rocket ships and all, Fred Butler brings us a cool time-lapse film compressing three weeks of prepping and launching Discovery.
• So, can I tell you something? You know I've liked the rock band Chicago since their second album was new. Well, over the years, I've had this occasional recurring dream-theme that somehow I'm on stage with them, singing or drumming or playing guitar or something. Well, here's a kid who actually lived that dream. Win or lose, I'd think that was pretty cool. (Thanks to DAOD for the link.)
• You've probably seen how "Lost" really ended:

• Like hummingbirds? My mother-in-law found a cute video of folks nursing a baby hummingbird back to health. Not high drama, but hey -- hummingbirds!
• Ooh, Heart-Attack Manor.

• Reader Barbara Jackson found that CNN has a religion blog. Golly... hope I don't lose you all to it....
• Because of one leaking oil well, Obama has decided to cancel baby steps towards energy independence. Brilliant. Say... do you think if someone mentioned thousands of years of statist tyranny, he might cancel all his plans to explode the size of the federal government?
• Nahh.
• Elections Have Consequences: Part 213975. In the restless full-court press to legitimatize the perversion du jour, the House moves ahead on forcing the one governmental agency (if I can describe it that way) that functions fairly well to become its latest experiment in social engineering.
• And now, three things not to try at ho... well, actually, not to try anywhere:

...and this

/

...and this:

• Food that stares back. (Warning: there is one risque... er, salad, or something.)
• Another Lost note: if you (like us) wondered at the significance of the final shots of the wreckage on the beach... there wasn't any. The network (not the producers) added them as an emotional transition to the news.
• Who could do over 560 words on Bruce Waltke, Tremper Longman, John Walton, and evolution taught in supposedly Bible-believing schools — and still manage to say nothing of value or real interest? Why, that would be Christianity Today, of course. (Note the total red-herring title.)
• Reader No Longer Blind found a sweet, effective British commercial promoting wearing seatbelts.
• The ancient philosophical conundrum, visualized:

• Some CA geeks might like this.
• I just like this guy more and more. (After you read that, read this.)
• It would be interesting to take the critics of this post at Pyro and ask them to see how Christianity Today wrote about the ending of Lost — and ask them if the Pyro post looks different afterwards.
• I'm starting to wonder whether category five commenters at Pyro are my thorn in the flesh.
• Investigators for insurance companies sometimes stage stuff like this:

• Never thought butter was that funny, myself, but DAOD found this:

• Bringing us all once again to....

Fly

It is almost, but not quite, all-video week at BibChr.

(c:

Enjoy.

Liberal self-image vs. reality

American liberals are desperate to feel bold, edgy, brave, daring, rebellious. What "Well done, good and faithful servant" is to a believer, "Bad boy!" is to a liberal.

This holds true in any sphere, whether politics or religion. Aging has-been Brian McLaren loves to position his books as daring and edgy, and himself as a beleagured outcast. It's likelier that Fosdick and others from the 1920's would sue for plagiarism.

Liberals in the media regularly show their Mommies how bad and naughty they are by filthy language, sexual crudity, and attacks on Christianity. I say "media" loosely by design. It's all over the internet, of course. I can't tell you how many times I've found a clever picture, video, or essay, begun to plan to share it with you — then little Johnny has to show Mommy what a bad boy he is by some verbal or visual obscenity or blasphemy.

A chief perp is Comedy Central, land of many big, bad mouths, and of South Park. In this, I confess not to being cool. I've tried it a few times, it's very clever... and it always gratuitously offends me, grosses me out, gives me an image or association that I don't need to add to the sewage I'm already having to pump out of the basement. So I pass.

They were in the news last month because Comedy Central censored an episode in which Islamists detected disrespect done to Mohammed (Muhammed, Muhammad, Mohammad, whatever). There was a threat, Comedy Central caved and censored.

Surreal flash-forward: the same network, however, is considering a blasphemous cartoon about Jesus.

So: if it is about the values of Christians — who insofar as they practice their faith do not express their disapproval by setting things on fire, beheading, threatening death and murder, and the like — liberals are all about being bold and brave and bad and edgy.

But Muslims? Ooh, now.

Must be sensitive and respectful. Mustn't offend anyone.

So we have a president who, with his party, shows sneering contempt for every distinctively Christian tenet and value, and who systematically pushes for oppression and marginalization of Christians. Obama himself can't even talk straight about Daniel Pearl, murdered on camera by Islamic extremists, standing right in front of his surviving family. Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder won't say that radical Islam motivated a radical Islamist to an act of terrorism. Yet at the same time, they pussy-foot in their language about Islamic extremists, won't speak of Islamic terrorism or extremism.

Yet at the same time, Christians are regularly depicted as if we're all in our basements planning how to murder the next baby-killer or bomb a federal building. Why?

Simply because we won't be assimilated.

A few unanswered "Lost" questions

Just two or three. (Spoilery. Companion to this post.)

Two things:

1. Thanks to my dear wife for this link
2. Offensive stuff at that site, be warned

Ahh, the maths

For all our homeschooling families busily working through the educational week.

Monday music: "Swagger Wagon"

Won't please everyone... but hey. Which ever did?

We're In Deep Trouble Update #1 - Eric Holder

Arrogance, incompetence, and power. What a scary combination. But that's this administration.

Gotta love, "I'll give you my copy of it if you would like to have a copy."

I think it's nice that Attorney General Holder says he'll read the law — which, unread, he has already criticized — before deciding whether it's constitutional.Hmm, wonder what he'll decide? Oh well, at least the hanging will be preceded by a fair trial.

Think this is a fluke? Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (Steyn says "Incompetano") used to be Governor of Arizona. She has also criticized the bill.

And also has not read it.

---

Maybe this starts a new occasional series of posts. Or maybe there won't be an update #2... but I'm afraid there probably will be.

Hither and thither 5/21/10

Well, lookie here: another week comed and goned. And here we are, just looking at each other.

Enough of that! Look at these:

• L, I B. Turns out dark chocolate is a health food! (What do you mean I'm reading it wrong?)
• Happy political news of the week: three-timing, unprincipled turncoat Arlen McSpecter (so called for his appeal to "Scottish law" in saying that behavior that would get a security guard or a short-order cook fired, and in deep trouble with the law, was no reason to unseat Clinton) is politically no more. I never forgave McSpecter for borking Bork. Political justice is slow, but it is nice to see it come at last in some degree.
• Perhaps part of the kiss of death to pro-abort Specter's treacherous career was Obama campaigning for him. In fact, Dems who did well last Tuesday were those who pretended opposition to the Obama regime's plans, in part or whole. Foolish voters. Such puny Dem opposition here and there won't make any difference. What matters is who they vote for to lead the House and Senate, and they'll vote for Dems like Pelosi and Reid. Because, hel-lo? Democrat! Part of abortion, government control of everything, erasing of moral lines?
• Oh my goodness. How do we get Gov. Chris Christie to leave New Jersey and run California? Vetoed a tax hike in two minutes. From what I've read so far, man's serious, focused, principled, and does not care what the media think of him. Love that.
• Wow, these South Korean soccer fans are really amazing. Some of the footage is obviously sped-up... but not that much, and it's still impressive.
• Reader Al Sends found out what stormtroopers do on their day off. (Warning: parents check site before letting your kids visit.)

• That same Al also found another reason to go iPhone or iPad.
• Staying with the "Al" theme, Al Mohler writes about a recent New Yorker essay about the quest for the historical Jesus. Frankly, I find Mohler's critique weak. He basically says, "Yeah, that's what happens when you jettison inspiration. Presuppositions are important." True, and true — and I'm sure the writer and all his heroes would agree. What about the rotten procedure of the writer? His ignoring Wright, and books like this? What about the utter ruinous nihilism that will necessarily result of such "historiography" prevails? Sounds like it called for a roundhouse kick, not a hand-slap.
• Reader Squirrel (then Joel Griffith as well) found some pretty fab Darth Vader helmets.
• Reader pastor Gary Benfold notes that the charges were dropped against the preacher who was arrested for calling water wet. No, wait, for calling homosexuality a "sin."
• In less happy British news, reader Angus Nicolson pointed me to a really well-written essay expressing horror at (A) the advertising of abortions (B) during a game show. Several lines are
  quotable, including: "...you can’t [swat] your kids, according to the European Court, but you can kill them up to birth if they have a hairlip."
• This "real-life Photoshop" panel is cute.
• Stuart Schwartz at the American Thinker does a nice job of documenting how Tim Tebow exposes the double-standard hypocrisy of God-haunted sports writers.
• Okay, now... this has got to be Photoshopped.

• Presbyterian: you're doing it wrong.
• Episcopalians ask themselves how many Scriptures they can violate with one move, come up with answer, and jump on it.
• In related news, a Church of England bishop says church leaders need to listen to the Holy Spirit, and listen to God in prayer. Surprise: (A) no mention of the inerrant, binding, sufficient Scriptures the Spirit inspired; and (B) no mention of the complete reformation that would result if they did. Not happy with what the Spirit has already said, I take it they hope He'll come up with something better.
• Gee... has that guy been commenting in my recent threads at Pyro? Hmm....
• Reader Pam Seigfried found some hysterically funny signs seen abroad (not all of which are in the best of taste... though maybe they were, in the signmaker's mind).

• Reader Chris Harwood notes how a clever gent leveraged Google to get himself interviews, and job offers.
• Yummy, and well done. Wedding cake shaped like AT-AT Walker.

• Hmm, though. Given that it's a wedding cake, I'm not sure they picked the wisest male figure. The temptation might be too great, to cry out...

• Muppets invade Lost producers. (BTW, no Lost spoilers; we don't see it until Friday or Saturday night.)
• Watching my cats wrestling with each other, I've been struck by what cool moves they bust out. Like what I've seen in the dojo. But... not quite like this:

• I trust we'd all agree that this teacher showed absolutely horrible judgment and taste. But now, I'm searching my memory... was there a widespread outcry over that movie which actually depicted the assassination of President Bush? During his administration? (To her credit, Hillary Clinton responded vehemently.)
• I have a funny mental image from this.

• Hate to admit but Los Angeles, in whose greater outskirts I grew up, has lost its mind. Again.
• But I do like Arizona's response.
• Thankfully, some Jews have publicly said that calling the Arizona law "Nazi" is inappropriate. Does liberalism prevent them from adding that it is asinine? One group guards borders against illegal invaders; the other prevents citizens from leaving and murders them? Yeah, exactly the same... except for all the specifics.
• Afraid my dear wife will groan and nod at this:

• Breaking news: wow, no one could have seen this coming! George Lucas tells the Lost producers that — are you sitting down? — he didn't plan out Star Wars in advance! That's right. You read it here.
• Your new job: go into the wilderness. Find a deadly animal. Get it really mad. Take a picture. Repeat, repeat, repeat. Sound like fun? Heck yeah... if you're a photographer with a death-wish!
• Now I leave you to your weekend, with these:

Illogical logic example: "proof" that the Tea Party is racist

I know a lot of people would like it if the Tea party movement were racist, so they could marginalize it, and ignore it. All I know for certain is that there have been rivers of accusations, but ne'er a trickle of actual, unambiguous, unmanipulated evidence.

But I want to focus very briefly on a bit of "logic" I heard Wednesday on Michael Medved's show. A very polite caller was trying hard to pin "racism" on the Tea Party. One of his proofs went like this:

1. Do you deny that most of the Tea Party is white?
2. Doesn't that prove that it is racist?

I didn't think that either the guest-host or his guest (R. Emmett Tyrrell) got to the heart of that progression, beyond heartily denying the charge. Well, one of them did ask whether the NBA was also racist by the same token, but the point seemed to elude the caller entirely.

I think part of why they didn't hammer the heart of the charge is that the charge itself puts one on the defensive. Honestly, how do you prove you're not a racist? "Some of my best friends are ____" is ridiculed as a response — but why isn't it actually a pretty good answer?

Regardless, it is deucedly hard to prove a negative. "Here, look! Here's a picture of me not being a racist!" Worse, the more you defend yourself, the guiltier you look.

And let's face it, to most of the accusers, the evidence phase of this trial is a mere formality. It's like Sherriff Cobb in the movie Silverado promising, "We're gonna give you a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging."

What I wanted to ask the caller is, "Do you have evidence of rivers of 'colored' people trying to join the movement and being shut out because of their skin-color?"

(In fact, I wanted to ask the caller if he wanted to join up, right then and there. When he declined, I'd ask him whose fault that was.)

I think the same thing about the GOP. One hears constantly that the GOP has to "reach out" to "people of color." Well, okay, fine... but how? First, show me evidence that "people of color" are trying to get in to the party, and are being shut out in some way. Then, stop that.

Why is the onus on conservatives to explain why more people of color don't join their efforts? Why, rather, isn't the onus on non-whites to explain what their issue is with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, with individual liberty and responsibility in a Judeo-Christian moral framework, with protecting babies, with sanity regarding marriage, with opposing tyranny and securing our borders? Why isn't the onus on them to explain why they want to support efforts to regulate everything, legislate everything, tax everything, flatten everything, turn everyone into dependent and subservient wards of the State?

In particular, why isn't the onus on non-whites who profess faith in Christ, yet voted for a man who opposes every distinctively Christian value they hold, a man with whom they share (or should share) no bonds except pigmentation? Church parking lots with cars still bearing Obama stickers — there is a problem.

I think that's where the burden of explanation lies. In saying that, I am also confessing that I don't know the answer. I know of some forces that have contributed... but if you show me a manure-pile, and I then dive into it, it isn't you who has the 'splaining to do.

I'll be completely candid. I don't know one conservative, private or public, who wouldn't weep for joy (virtually or actually) to see "minorities" pouring into the conservative movement and filling up positions of leadership.

Also: everything I've just finished saying about the conservative movement goes double for Calvinistic Christians.

So in sum: I'm not even close to being convinced that the blame for white majority numbers among conservatives — or Calvinists — lays on whites themselves.

Not even close.

Pixels (very cool short)

Now reportedly being developed into a feature, by Adam Sandler.

Scientists are baffled!

My friend and brother, Missionary to Honduras Mike Pettengill, sent me a series of articles with a single theme: Scientists Baffled! I've added a few of my own. Here you go:

1. Voyager 2 is now sending back signals in an unknown data format. What is it saying to us? Scientists are baffled!
2. The fakir is not a fakir! An Indian religious-type guy went 10 days without eating, drinking, or eliminating, in a tightly-controlled environment. How did he do it? Scientists are baffled!
3. How did the statues on Easter Island get moved around? Nobody knows! Scientists are baffled! (Money-quotation: " like many other archaeologists, he was so swayed by his cast iron belief that the roads were for transportation – he completely ignored them.”)
4. A grey whale off the coast of Israel, when they are only known to roam the Pacific Ocean? How did that happen? Nobody knows! Scientists are baffled! (Money-quotation: "The best guess from Scheinin is global warming played a role.")
5. A rooster named Gianni used to wake up his owners with his crowing. Then a fox killed all the hens. Then Gianni started laying eggs. Huh? Yep. He'd become a hen. How'd that happen Nobody knows! Scientists are baffled!
6. The planet Jupiter has all these stripes, right? These bands? Yeah, well now it suddenly has one less! Huh? How'd that happen? Nobody knows. Scientists are baffled! (Oh, and btw: it wasn't a professional scientist who noticed it. It was an amateur astronomer.)

Golly, there's so much scientists don't know, don't understand!

Well, except evolution, of course. Stung by years of folks pointing out that evolution is a theory incapable of demonstration or falsification, they have officially elevated it to a Fact. Not just a Fact, but a Fact without which absolutely no science of any sort can be done. So there! They're sure about that. And that the Bible's wrong about... well, about whatever. And that God is irrelevant to the most important areas of thought. About those things, they're dead-sure.


For instance: brand-new study "finds" (not guesses, speculates, or hypothesizes) that all life came from a single-celled organism. Well, not only that... but creationism is an "absolutely horrible hypothesis." And creationists are weenies who won't respond when given a chance. So... so there! Will you religious people please go back into hiding and cede us the floor?


Same time I saw that article, I saw another listing six more things scientists can't explain. (Not linking, because that site contains too many offensive images and invitations.)


All very interesting, isn't it? When they're off-guard, you see a constant flow of stories about scientists being "baffled," or divided, or revising their long-held certain and sure theories.

But here's the thing. Without admitting it, many scientists commit to a religious philosophy called Materialism, which assumes God out of existence. So assuming, they lose the claim to speak with authority on anything.

Was that a leap? Not at all. Scientists cannot claim to be omniscient. They cannot claim access to an authority in complete command of all facts without exception. They just hypothesize, guess, speculate, from atom to atom.

Therefore they cannot (with credibility) make a unified theory of anything. How do they know that one of these "baffling" phenomena does not contain a fact that will undo everything they think? They don't. How do they know that such a fact does not exist in the thousands of acres of Earth not yet explored, let alone in the universe? They don't.

But you say, they proceed empirically, by experimentation. Correct — experiments resting on mountains of unproven and unprovable assumptions. The whole notion of "experimentation" assumes a continuity to the universe that they have no right to assume, on their premises. Do a test, and X occurs. What have you proven? That X occurred once. Repeat the test 300 times, and X occurs each time. What have you proven? That X occurred 300 times. Nothing more, nothing less.

Further, you don't really know what caused X to occur. The whole notion of causation is itself an assumption, unproven and unprovable.

So next time you read, "Scientists baffled," just think to yourself, "More than you know, buddy. A whole lot more."

The Christian's stance is identical, and different. Natively, he does not possess one grain, one atom more information. He's not a tick smarter nor brighter.

However, the Biblically-faithful Christian (A) admits the fact at the outset, (B) has recourse to a Source who actually is in command not only of all conceivable facts, ever, but also of the significance of all conceivable facts, ever. That is because He created them. And (C) He has taken the initiative to reveal everything we need to know to have a relationship with Him.

And that is the Christian's stance.

30:1 The words of Agur son of Jakeh. The oracle.

The man declares, I am weary, O God;
I am weary, O God, and worn out.
2 Surely I am too stupid to be a man.
I have not the understanding of a man.
3 I have not learned wisdom,
nor have I knowledge of the Holy One.
4 Who has ascended to heaven and come down?
Who has gathered the wind in his fists?
Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is his name, and what is his son's name?
Surely you know!

5 Every word of God proves true;
he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.
6 Do not add to his words,
lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar.

(Proverbs 30:1-6)

UPDATE: M'man Frank tag-teams, which is always a good thing in my book.

Timothe and Hagrid, chillin'

Monday music: "Bible Book Bop," by Go Fish

This little dittie by Go Fish serves nicely as an antidote to the sad state commented on in this Pyro post. Thanks to reader Angie for the suggestion.

I know this has helped adults memorize the books of the Bible. I don't think it would have worked with me. Too fast, and too much besides the Bible books. With my kids, I used a books of the NT song that (I think) I got from my dear wife.

For the books of the Old Testament, I made up my own song to teach them, using some familiar tune I can't possibly name for you. The lyrics are just the names of the books. Well, apart from the "ba da da da da" and the "ba-dum bum."

Hither and thither 5/14/10

Busy week. I am bound and determined to get that Proverbs manuscript gone over finally today. God willing. So, I'm getting HT right out. There may be updates, but if you check back at noon PT, you should see them all.

Still, I've a few things for you to chew over.

• Just... can't... take... eyes... off... of... that..... Must try!
• You know, seriously? I have the same reaction when I see someone chewing gum while I'm preaching.
• And while I'm on that, at some point this year, I had a first: a preacher, chewing (presumably) gum as he preached.
• I have no opinion about this list of the six worst Christian bands, ever. [WARNING: I don't know whether that site had inappropriate pix of scantily-clad women in the sidebar originally and I just missed it, or whether they were added after I grabbed the link. Either way, they're there now. Sorry. This is a constant problem, and I can't use a lot of neat things I find for that very reason. It's as if 3/4 of The Intrawebs is run by a poorer class of 13-year-old boys.] Mostly I recognize "The Killer Bees" (aka Stryper). I was "there" at the start of Christian rock, going to Calvary Chapel's Saturday night concerts in Costa Mesa. That was a lot of fun. We all wanted these bands to make albums. To most of them who did, something happened between the live concert and the studio. Something bad. My feeling was that the "something bad" was old white guys who didn't understand rock and said "You know what this needs? Strings! Strings and... and less guitar! And less drums!" Before you know it, all the crackle and pop and sizzle of the live performance was produced out. Result: elevator music. (Hi Justin!)
• One of the best bands I remember seeing was one called "Aslan." Their configuration and music were reminiscent of Kansas, down to the rockin' violin. Recorded one song on one multi-musician album, as I recall, which was nothing like what we got in concert. Pity.
• Ooh — reader Yurie Hwang found a three-level Imperial walker bunk-bed!

• Chan-watchers: make sense of this.
• Ask me for a list of ten best science fiction movies, ever, and the  list will probably change with each telling. But one movie will always be on the list: Forbidden Planet. If you like scifi, and haven't seen it... well, first, dude, where have you been? See it. Duh. But second, as I've mentioned, the creator of Babylon 5, the best / one of the best scifi TV series, ever, has been tasked with scripting a prequel. That would be J. Michael Straczynski, an atheist who is very interested in religion unless you try to persuade him of anything. (I speak from experience.) I don't now how reliable he is, but this guy claims to have the script in his possession. It's quite spoilery, so I skimmed.
• And now... The Pietrix.

• My dear wife doesn't much like going to Golden Corral, because it's so danged noisy. I'm wondering whether this might be the answer. Then Da Boyz and I can get all our meat!
• Liquid mountaineering. (It's a joke.)
• From everything I see and hear and read, I really like this guy. Now, how can I get him come be the governor of my state? Schwarzeneggar talked like this is what he did... but he didn't do it, much.
• Oatmeal lists out seventeen things worth knowing about your cat. I already knew... er, a few. (Dear Wife will say she knew them all.)
• Ohhhh, dude. About this, I can only say: EPIC WIN.
• Good to know our congressmen are hard at work. Potty Parity Act. (Thanks to reader Aaron.) See also here.
• Trying to break the Goldfish habit? Here, thanks to reader Berry Davis, let me help:

• Got five bucks? Then you might be able to win a day with Bill Clinton. Gotta say, I'm tempted. But I'm pretty sure that, after an hour or two, he'd be begging me to take my $5 back.
• Reader Tim in Minnesota has solid rocket fuel for the paranoids in the audience.
• In a hard-hitting editorial, Jeffrey T. Kuhner explains why Obama Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is a horrid choice for the court. He notes that she is "a radical leftist who would rubber-stamp Mr. Obama's transformative socialist agenda, and she "is not an independent, serious nominee, but an Obama ideological clone," and "incompetent apparatchik, whose only purpose is to blindly advance Mr. Obama's revolutionary progressivism." Then he says some really critical things. Would to God voters had sobered up and heeded the warnings in time.

• Jacob Sullum specifically (and euphemistically) notes that Kagan "looks wobbly on freedom of speech." He notes her assertion, in a case argued before the Supreme Court, that "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs." In other words, if the government decides that a given speech (editorial, blog post, sermon) has no "value," it may Constitutionally forbid it. Chief Justice John Roberts replied that this claim was "startling and dangerous," and added that "The First Amendment's guarantee of free speech does not extend only to categories of speech that survive an ad hoc balancing of relative social costs and benefits," and that "Our Constitution forecloses any attempt to revise that judgment simply on the basis that some speech is not worth it."

• Today's Title of the Week is: Have aliens hijacked Voyager 2 spacecraft[?]. Well... it was sent out before the Arizona law....
• Last week I linked to a creepy, Orwellian tax collection commercial. Since then, some creative Republicans (—oxymoron?) used it as a model for a pretty sharp ad. Check it out.
• I link to Challies just about as often as he links to me. But this is a terrific idea and a good read. Tim selects quotations from Joel Osteen and from fortune cookies, and asks readers to guess which is which. (I only got six right.)
• Reader Trogdor thinks the good Admiral should have known better.

• Only a few will care about this one (maybe Frank). Artist Frank Frazetta just died. Frazetta most famously did artwork for book covers, among other media, including the Conan books. He had a very distinctive style. Unfortunately, a lot of his art would have to be rated PG-13 or mildly R. Below are a couple of fair examples of what was distinctive in Frazetta's paintings: sharply-focused center, fading out to chaotic edges. Very vividly gave the "feel" of the fantasy-universe in which the stories were set. As a young teen, he inspired me to try oil painting.

 

• Introduction of "contraceptive methods" was not entirely good, leading to irresponsible promiscuity, and making faithlessness too easy an option. Marriage is the cornerstone of society. A supportive husband can make the difference between abortion and giving birth. But hey, it's not me saying that. It's Raquel Welch.
• This is a heartwarming video from over at our Rachael's place (as opposed to my Rachael, the DAOD).
• Once you get past the too-common offensive acronym in the title, this is a pretty funny series of pictures of guys ironing in various bizarre situations. Like these:

• IMPORTANT SAFETY TIP. Summer is coming, I imagine many of my readers own guns. Here's a little tip you should memorize, and make all your family memorize. If you ever hear, coming out of your mouth or anyone's mouth, the words: "Don't worry, this gun's not even loaded!" — consider that a Sign from God that you should stop everything, and seriously reconsider whatever you were about to do. Ask late gangster Phillip Collopy. Or, for that matter, one of the most talented guitarists ever, Terry Kath. Except you can't ask them.
• Reader Al Sends thinks he may have found the worst web design, ever. I think he may be right.
• Aaand...