Whoda thunkit? It turns out that one puzzling and disturbing episode in a board game revealed a church’s fundamental paradigm flaw—one that it took me years to figure out!
Here’s the story:
Having recently joined a new church in the mid 1980s, I attended a Friday night college devotional, along with about 80 other members. Continue reading
Recently, a friend sent me a link to an old acquaintance’s blog. My friend noted that the blogger had been significantly challenged by a commenter, and she wondered whether he would respond. Last night I checked again to see, after several weeks, and sadly, the blogger has not responded.
Having had hundreds of “debates”, particularly online, I’ve seen this happen over and over. Someone makes a point, for which evidence or reason is shown in disproof, then the original poster has no reply. I call this “crickets”, as in, “All I heard was crickets chirping in the still night air.” Continue reading
NOTE: Please keep in mind as you read that the author belongs to no political party, and generally eschews them as bastions of compromise and corruption.
One doesn’t have to listen to people discuss presidential primary candidates for long before he hears the nervous question, “…but is he electable?” This question is often asked in conjunction with the notion that “I don’t want to waste my vote” (by voting for a candidate who is not “electable”).
I’ll cut to the chase right away and state quite unapologetically that I think that this extremely-popular political idea is counterproductive, short-sighted, and just plain stupid!
And now it falls to me, naturally, to support my assertion. Continue reading
Updates to this story:
23 February. Jonathon Strong replies to my request for the public documents, referring me to www.fec.gov and sending the following PDF, calling it “the ones that are difficult to get”. He states further that the Congressional expenditures “aren’t online anywhere”. Here’s the PDF.
23 February. Columnist Jonathon Strong replies to my email, stating that the documents have now been posted and are linked to in his 21 February story (detailed below). The links are: http://www.rollcall.com/media/newspics/RonPaulAmericanExpress.pdf http://www.rollcall.com/media/newspics/RonPaulChecks.pdf I have not had time to examine these documents. I will post my analysis when it is finished.
23 February. I emailed Jonathon Strong asking that he post the “public documents” (House of Representatives reimbursement records) that would show that the House had also paid for the flights reimbursed by Liberty Committee.
From: Jack Pelham [mailto:jack@jackpelham.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 10:18 AM
To: ‘Jonathan Strong’
Subject: RE: Evidence for Ron Paul Airline Tickets storyMr. Strong:
Thank you for substantiating your article further with these source documents. I think that the only things the reader will need now to do his own investigation will be the reply of Ron Paul to this evidence and a link to the “public records” that show he was reimbursed by the House of Representatives. I know you can’t make Ron Paul make a statement, but could you also post the public records?
Thanks for your work on this important story.
Jack Pelham
22 February. Limbaugh mentions it on 22 February….wondering aloud whether the moderators in the debate tonight (22 February) will ask Paul about it.
—————————————
In a 6 February 2012 article entitled Records Show Ron Paul Trips Paid Twice, Roll Call staff writer, Jonathon Strong, claims that records obtained by Roll Call show that Congressman Ron Paul has repeatedly been reimbursed by the House of Representatives and various Paul-run political organizations for airline tickets. These double reimbursements are said to have occurred over the past twelve-or-so years. The article makes the assertion, but shows none of the documentation from which these finds are said to have come.
Call me crazy, but I don’t think this story is a done deal until the evidence has been viewed Continue reading
The idea is very simple: Get one million Americans to read the Constitution!
This project is currently in mothballs as it proved that America simply is not interested in reading her own Constitution at this present time. The project was a simple one, simply promoting a reading event from September 11 through September 17 (Constitution Day). In that week, the goal would be to get 1 million Americans to read the Constitution online and to check off that they did it. That’s it. No partisanship, no spin, no ads, no ulterior motive.
Except for a very few Facebook friends, nobody showed any interest in it after about a year of leaving the website up, so I took it down. It would seem that America is not interested in taking any new steps to fix herself…even when those steps are obvious, small, and simple. Thus does our work continue in our search for a way to inspire America simply to care about herself in some reality-based way.
Everybody in America knows that neither of the two major political parties is in a position to work toward its own goals without interference from the “other side”. Indeed, we hear about that with every election cycle, and practically every day. In this post, however, I’d like to head in a different direction—and I’ll need the assistance of a little “make believe” to get there. So here’s what I’m proposing:
Imagine that your favorite political party suddenly had political superpowers such as no party has never even dared to imagine. Let us suppose Continue reading
The bulk of what follows is a response I wrote to a post on DailyPaul.com. It has been slightly edited so as to stand alone better. Regarding the Ron Paul campaign, the poster asked, “Are we trying to WIN?”. The poster further suggested that since 79% of voters are in the age range 45-65+, someone should create a “very slick ad” to reach that audience.
What follows is my reply. Continue reading
Throughout my life, I’ve argued and argued with people about the various tenets of their beliefs, whether the subject matter is religion, politics, science, or whatever else. In this time, I’ve been amazingly ineffective at persuading most of those with whom I’ve argued, and I suppose that in this regard, I could well be considered a failure. Where one might assume that logic, fact, and legitimate sourcing would settle an argument, it seems instead that something more sinister is at play–something akin to addiction.
That aside for the moment, however, 0ne very interesting thing happened along the way in all these debates: I was persuaded. Continue reading
This topic probably deserves a book of its own, but for now, I wanted to post some observations.
I’ve been watching, and I see a general rule at work in our society: Most people don’t want what they need. Instead, they want what they want, and they’re quite willing to neglect their needs, or even to lie to themselves (and others) about the nature and importance of those needs. Continue reading
RE: Removal of my post at DailyPaul.com
Mr. Nystrom:
On 2 January 2012, I wrote to you to at DailyPaul.com to inquire as to whether you were personally behind the censoring of a post I had written on your website. That post had a short excerpt along with a link to my own blog article, Ron Paul Campaign Failing to Ask Supporters for Much More Than Money. The piece criticized the Paul campaign for having no apparent plan to build the type of strong popular movement necessary to achieve the level of reform the campaign claims to desire. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I chose to inquire whether it was you or some “rogue moderator” who had removed my post from Daily Paul. You replied thus (emphasis added): Continue reading
