Noam Chomsky on Ron Paul

I’ve taken a few samples but click here for the whole article:

Questioner: Hello Mr. Chomsky. I’m assuming you know who Ron Paul is. And I’m also assuming you have a general idea about his positions. Here my summary of Mr. Paul’s positions:
– He values property rights, and contracts between people (defended by law enforcement and courts).

Noam Chomsky: Under all circumstances? Suppose someone facing starvation accepts a contract with General Electric that requires him to work 12 hours a day locked into a factory with no health-safety regulations, no security, no benefits, etc. And the person accepts it because the alternative is that his children will starve. Fortunately, that form of savagery was overcome by democratic politics long ago. Should all of those victories for poor and working people be dismantled, as we enter into a period of private tyranny (with contracts defended by law enforcement)? Not my cup of tea.

– He wants to take away the unfair advantage corporations have (via the dismantling of big government)

Noam Chomsky: “Dismantling of big government” sounds like a nice phrase. What does it mean? Does it mean that corporations go out of existence, because there will no longer be any guarantee of limited liability? Does it mean that all health, safety, workers rights, etc., go out the window because they were instituted by public pressures implemented through government, the only component of the governing system that is at least to some extent accountable to the public (corporations are unaccountable, apart from generally weak regulatory apparatus)? Does it mean that the economy should collapse, because basic R&D is typically publicly funded — like what we’re now using, computers and the internet? Should we eliminate roads, schools, public transportation, environmental regulation,….? Does it mean that we should be ruled by private tyrannies with no accountability to the general public, while all democratic forms are tossed out the window? Quite a few questions arise.

– He defends workers right to organize (so long as owners have the right to argue against it).

Noam Chomsky: Rights that are enforced by state police power, as you’ve already mentioned.
There are huge differences between workers and owners. Owners can fire and intimidate workers, not conversely. just for starters. Putting them on a par is effectively supporting the rule of owners over workers, with the support of state power — itself largely under owner control, given concentration of resources.

Why A Woman President Would Ruin America

Dr. Michael J. Bisconti, who currently has 8 doctorates (I can has diploma mill?), gives us 12 perfectly sane reasons why a female president would be bad for America:

REASON #1
God has commanded that women shall NOT lead nations. This commandment of God is found in the Holy Scriptures, the Bible, the Word of God.

REASON #2
God has commanded that women shall NOT lead men. In leading nations, women would be leading men. Therefore, women cannot lead nations. The commandment of God that women shall NOT lead men is found in the Holy Scriptures, the Bible, the Word of God.

REASON #4

Women are more likely to make wrong decisions than men. This truth is stated in the Bible and proven by history.

REASON #10
A woman would be incapacitated more than 3% of the time because of natural, physiological events. What if this happened during a time of national crisis such as the “9/11 Attack”?

From J-Walk who also found another article with illustrations by Doc Bisconti on “How To Tell if You Act Like a Slut:

Huckabee Claimed Jesus ‘On The Cross’ Supported The Death Penalty

From Think Progress:

But in 1997, Huckabee claimed that Jesus would have agreed with him on supporting the death penalty. Shortly before a triple execution in Arkansas in Jan. 1997, a caller called into Huckabee’s show on Arkansas Educational Television Network and asking how he squared his Christian teachings with his support for the death penalty. As the Arkansas Times reported on Jan. 22, 1997:

“Interestingly enough,” Huckabee allowed, “if there was ever an occasion for someone to have argued against the death penalty, I think Jesus could have done so on the cross and said, ‘This is an unjust punishment and I deserve clemency’.”

And few people realize that Mario is also a big supporter of the death penalty.

(Mario Crucifix from MyConfinedSpace)

Manila Cemetery Houses More Warm Bodies Than Cold Corpses

A fascinating article about 10,000 Filipino families living in a cemetery.

10,000 Filipino families live in this massive graveyard in Manila. I recently spent five days walking among its residents taking photos and hearing stories of struggle and survival.

Some families ended up here almost accidentally. Some inherited the mausoleums that they now live in from their great-grandparents. Others came from the provinces and couldn’t make enough money to live in the big city. In all cases, they’re basically families with nowhere else to go.

The people who live here manage to extract livelihoods from the dead. Teenagers carry coffins for 50 Filipino pesos—about 50 American cents. Children collect scrap metal, plastic, and other garbage to sell. Their fathers are employed to repair and maintain tombs while their mothers maintain the house, which could be the family mausoleum or the mausoleum of their employers. Rent-free shanties are wedged between or on top of crypts.

(Thanks Jason)

The Blasphemy Collection


20 infamous cases of blasphemy.

The concept of blasphemy seemed for some decades to be in decline in the West, but not any more. It may be useful to look back at some recent cases of militantly religious outrage…

Rated by
Vulgarity –the piece shocked through its conflation of the sacred and the profane
Criminality –the piece contravened laws in a given country
Religious impact –the work caused outrage from religious leaders
Political impact –speeches were made by governments, laws were created or changed.
Deaths – outrage at the work led to the death of one or more people