We have missed a great opportunity. Instead of passing a debt ceiling agreement, we should have just let the poop hit the fan and let everything fall though. Bills would go unpaid- then we would learn what our true priorities are and pay those. Continue Reading

Hinduism

1. Hinduism is not Polytheism. It’s Henotheism, meaning each god is believed to be a window on the One or the All.

2. In Hinduism, “the physical realm doesn’t exist.”
The supreme reality is known as Brahman. The same god, if you can’t grasp the abstractness of infinite cosmos represented by an infinite being, can be encountered physically by Saguna Brahman, god-with-physical-attributes. This version of the deity is very close to the Jewish and Christian image of God as the loving Father. If nothing exist, how can there be Saguna Brahman, by your argument?

3. Hinduism’s Karma divide them into a cast system and divides them void of any human sympathy. “They got what they deserved by karma’s justice.”
In Hinduism, nothing stands alone; nothing is or can be separate from anything else. Harm to one part is harm to another; benefit to one part benefits others as well. In this sense, what one person does to another, that person does to himself or herself. This is the true meaning of the law of karma, sometimes called the laww of sowing and reaping: “In my ignorance it may seem to me that I can inflict harm on my foot without harming the rest of me, but if I think this I am simply deluded.”

Also “Refrain from harming living things” sounds like “Thou shalt not kill.” in Christianity.

Karma is very much like African communal ethics .Instead of emphasizing the autonomous individual, African ethics tends to focus on the communal nature of human society and consequently on the reciprocal character of human moral obligations: ubuntu. Ubuntu asserts the basic connectedness of all human beings ,ven those of victim and perpetrator. Tutu puts it this way: “The African view is that a person is a person through other persons. My humanity is caught up with your humanity, and and when your humanity is enhanced — whether I like it or not — mine is enhanced as well. Likewise, when you are dehumanized, inexorably, I am dehumanized as well.”

The deep African yearning for communal peace and harmony rests on this view of personhood. You probably know that this is the root of South Africa’s Restorative Justice between 1995 and 1998, after Apartheid ended. Nelson Mandela, did not seek vengeance, but sought healing for the entire community, rather than mere retribution in a racially polarized society where the wealth of the country belonged mostly to the White Dutch. He did not seek redistribution of wealth, but harmony instead.

Karma is also very close to what’s called the ethics of care, observed by Carol Gilligan, describing the culture and ethics between women universally. She explains that an authnomous self sees morality in terms of justice, fairness, and rules and rights, whereas a caring self focuses more on people’s needs, wants, and aspirations. “In our culture, men’s concern for autonomy tends to lead them to the first viewpoint, whereas women’s concern for relationships often leads them to the second.”

If you think Christianity is the only religion that’s got it right when it comes to ethics and morality: “morality tends to be mostly black and white, with very little gray area like how the Bible clearly defines right from wrong” like you stated in your personal view, then you haven’t really studied Law.

For example, from East to the West, the old Soviet Union to a highly individualistic society such as the United States of America, Substantive Law is defined as such. If you think right and wrong is black and white encompassed by universal morality (and none of it is a social construct), then take a look at the international justice system!

“Substantive law encompasses both criminal and civil law since it defines the boundaries, limitations, and exceptions. For instance, substantive law addresses what types of felonies and misdemeanors exist.

In order to pass Substantive Laws, it must go through a lengthy process of drafting, editing, and voting in the legislature before the president can approve it. However, substantive law can also come to pass through an initiative wherein the public (and common people) can vote on its passing into codification.

There are instances when substantive law can be repealed. Such instances are only done when it is proven by public voting that the law is antiquated or is unnecessary. When these instances occur, a process is undergone in order to rescind the specific law so as to ensure that substantive law is clear and concise.”

Buddhism (a religion that sprung out of Hinduism)

1. You ridiculed Buddhism for monks deluding themselves to think of one’s non-existence. However, humans are contingent beings, and there is no logical contradiction in thinking of ourselves as not existing.

2. You said, “Buddha was agnostic or even could have being an Atheist.” Buddha was not against God. He was only against notions of God that are mere mental constructions that do not correspond to reality, notions that prevent us from developing ourselves and touching ultimate reality. Buddhism have said “a good theologian will say almost nothing about God, because the notion of God might be an obstacle for us to touch God as love, wisdom, and mindfulness.” People can worship the Buddha and can believe whatever they want to distort Buddhism into a religion! But if you go into a monastery, novice monks in the Buddhist tradition are told, “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!” One must kill the Buddha concept to experience the real Buddha directly. All images and scriptures are limiting, allowing some possibilities and excluding others. The “real thing” is so much more. “When the Master’s finger points toward the moon, it is vital to see the moon, not the finger.”

3. You said. “In Buddhism, nothing exists. If nothing exist, why bother doing anything.” Well, karma exists. This communal philosophy and ethics exists. Reincarnation exists .Natural Laws are everywhere in the Buddhist Scripture about the condition and reality of this world. They are very different from the religions of the Book (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) in which rules for living are laid down by a superior being who demands obedience and judges disobedience, in Buddhism ( a much more relaxed and laid-back philosophy ) there is only the invitation to wake up and see things as they are. What Buddha said are mere suggestions, guideposts along the way from someone who has traveled farther and can help show the path. You are under no obligation to follow them, unless you wish to suffer less.

The natural laws in the Buddhist scriptures tell you if you wear bathing suit into the freezing weather, you will die or at least get frostbite. You can choose to ignore the “true nature of the world” and suffer as a consequence, or you can choose to sober up.

According to religions of the Book, the human condition is a fallen one. Having lost our original innocence in the Garden of Eden, we are predisposed to sin. In Buddhism, such a condition is described as “a person who does not understand the true nature of the world is variously described as asleep or drunk; the goal is to wake or sober up to reality.” Buddhism is a complicated philosophy with thousands of years of addition and revision. Nothing exists yet everything exists. I think you made up your joke about questioning a Buddhist “If nothing exist, why share your faith.” “Hmmm…” the Buddhist replied, “You got me there.”

Existentialism: (which borrowed heavily from Buddhism, you have to read the actual text to see this or you’ll think Existentialism is something completely original)

1. You overly simplified Existentialism and condemn Nietzsche as the biggest anti-Christ, because of the obvious: “God is Dead.” But you missed the whole point about Existentialism. Did you know that Christianity is borrowing heavily from Existentialism these days from another form of it called Humanistic Psychology.

“Humanistic psychology is a psychological perspective which rose to prominence in the mid-20th century, drawing on the work of early pioneers like Carl Rogers and the philosophies of existentialism. It adopts a holistic approach to human existence through investigations of meaning, values, freedom, tragedy, personal responsibility, human potential, spirituality, Christianity, and self-actualization.” – Wikipedia “Humanistic Psychology”

Jean-Paul Sartre was a Christian who insisted that there are no fixed essences. A person is neither fixed by heredity nor trapped by environment, but instead is free at every moment to actualize any possibility. It’s an empowering belief!

Democracy and Capitalism and Freedom (ideas which were heavily influenced by Existentialism, in which the West borrowed from the Eastern religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism)

“While meaningful existence (or authenticity) is slightly different for Søren Kierkegaard than it is for Friedrich Nietzsche or Jean-Paul Sartre, in all cases it is something that can only be brought to fruition if it becomes part of one’s subjectivity. Making the existential project “mine” is only hindered by the objectification that results when conscious intention or individual choice is displaced by norms from without. This objectification, therefore, refers to the manner in which those properties that are singular to my existence are rendered into generalized and meaningless categoricals. Because politics itself was considered one of these categoricals – a matrix of duties and forced socialization that hindered authenticity or transcendence – politics was scaled back to serve the basic requirements of equilibrium and the restraint of harm.

But there was another facet to existentialism which resonated with American intellectuals: its commitment to realism and even an “essential” realism. Specifically, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche illustrated how the constancy of certain existential truths such as power and sin served to compromise all political action. American political thinkers absorbed this mode of thought and crafted a political realism which took for granted a darkened human nature. The result was a particular brand of realpolitik and a narrative of political fallibility that eschewed change (political activism) and criticized the liberal-democratic emphasis on progress and popular political participation.” – Existentialism and Politics (p 12)

If you are an apologist for Christianity thinking “Christianity is true and reasonable because it works in real life!” Well, I think you shot yourself in the foot with that argument. I hope I have shown you that Eastern Religions also work, and they work even better than Christianity!

I personally think being a moderate in anything is the best way to live, especially being a moderate in your worldviews. Some of the teachings of Conservative Christianity just cannot measure up against cold and cruel reality of the world. These are a few examples.

(1. Prayer)
I don’t believe a God, like how the Christian Conservative churches teach, is a Universal Vending Machine to our personal prayers and that our prayers are magical somehow as Christians when prayed with enough faith of a “mustard seed” that can move mountains. Continue Reading

I have got to stop eating out at these back alley streets here in China. It’s summer; and it’s hot: and all the foods here in China are rotten!

Did you know that Chinese people eat dogs too? Yeah, they put them in a stew. And it’s delicious!
They eat cats too. But there is just not enough meat on the cats.

Dog meats are mostly lean, as compared to pork. Continue Reading

To begin with, it would be nice initially because there would be no crime, no jealousy, hate, anger, poverty, starvation that you see all around the world… But then, each day would be just like the last — perfect.

This may sound like paradise to Christians, but it sounds very bland to me. With no challenges would I grow and develop as a person? If never faced with a problem to overcome, I know I would become complacent, even bored. Continue Reading

Well, I had every good intention of giving the End of the World* my undivided attention.

Unfortunately, I had several things on my to do list that took precedence and, before I knew it, the day was upon me. Looked at my watch and it was half past midnight on the 21st of May.

Oh sure, I know I have until 6 p.m. to get something written about the world coming to an end today, but honestly, my day is pretty much packed with other stuff to do. Continue Reading

“Why are we here?”
“What is the meaning of life?”
“What’s the ultimate purpose of life?”
“Where are we headed as human beings?”
“Is there a God — a personal God as religion states?”

It is quite useless and senseless to ask these questions or hope for an definite answer since all of those who came before us for thousands of years were not able answer them. And also there are no “Real” answers to the value-laden questions that ever eludes our understanding and ever escapes our grasps. Continue Reading

It has already started, the “What were you doing when you heard the news that Osama bin Laden was killed?” Most of us were getting ready for bed or already there on a Sunday evening when the news broke. Not much else to remember, just that as soon as we heard, we couldn’t turn off the television. Continue Reading

The term traitor has taken on new connotations in recent years. Once meant to determine someone who has with serious and direct intent caused damage to a nation or its inhabitants; the recent mutation of its meaning is to indicate anyone who says anything against the wishes of those in power, especially prevalent during the Cheney domination. Continue Reading

Unemployment took an unexpected turn for the better, with 216,000 new jobs added to payroll last month. And while The USA Today reported that 2010 saw median incomes rise 2.1%, it also reported that median CEO pay jumped 27% for the same period.

To summarize today versus last year:
- If you didn’t have a job, there’s a 12% chance* you found one.
- If you did have a job, your income went up about 2%
- If you are a CEO, your income went up an average of $1.9 million. Continue Reading

Jim DeMint, Crazy of Just Plain Full of Shizz?

Recent addition to the Fair & Balanced FOX club, Wall Street Journal, has published an editorial by one of the most fair, most balanced senators in the history of America. Sure, Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) has publicly said that he doesn’t think openly gay teachers should be allowed to teach in public schools, but there’s no mention of that on the Wall Street Journal, so let’s pretend it doesn’t apply.

In a nutshell
Senator DeMint’s argument is that the federal government should de-fund PBS, NPR and all associated entities. I get that we need to tighten our belts, but what are his reasons? I ask because they will go straight to his motivations, almost as if by magic.

Prepare yourself for some serious double-speak, dissembly and at least a few outright lies.

“While executives at the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR) are raking in massive salaries…”

Okay, already a lot to chew on. Excessive salaries? No. Salaries for NPR, PBS and affiliated public broadcasting entities are far, far lower than those from for-profit companies. You can’t argue with a straight face that the head of NPR earns even half as much as his colleague at FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS or pretty much any other news outfit, and that includes Current TV.

“The so-called commercial free public airwaves have been filled with pleas for taxpayer cash.”

Right, because they can’t sell ads and the federal government won’t fully fund them… how does the senator expect them to fund their operations?

Lobbyists for America
“The Association of Public Television Stations has hired lobbyists to fight the cuts. Hundreds of taxpayer-supported TV, radio and Web outlets have partnered with an advocacy campaign to facilitate emails and phone calls to Capitol Hill for the purpose of telling members of Congress, “Public broadcasting funding is too important to eliminate!”"

Three things on this. First, lobbying is not an invention of public radio or television. Second, isn’t a phone call from a constituent the exact way you know what the real pulse of the public is? And third, are you genuinely arguing that public broadcasting is so unimportant that it can or should be eliminated?

CEO Pay and Disparity
“But if PBS can pay Ms. Kerger $632,233 in annual compensation—as reported on the 990 tax forms all nonprofits are required to file—surely it can operate without tax dollars.”

Wall Street still pays its junior analysts bonuses on the order of a million dollars, on top of their salaries… We don’t want to open that can of worms, so let’s just say agree that, while CEO pay may be disproportionately high, there is NO NETWORK executive that earns less than three-times what she does, and she coordinates more original programming, more stations and more journalists than any of her rivals.

That means she’s getting a third of the pay for twice the work, and it’s all for public broadcasting.

I could go down the line by the individuals listed by Mr. DeMint, but that would only ask too many questions he can’t (and honestly won’t even bother to) answer.

Media is wide open to all
“Today’s media landscape is a thriving one with few barriers to entry…”

As a would-be break-in media outlet working for 9-years, you’ll have to pardon me if I call bullshit on this. I have worked as a writer and editor on more than a dozen media upstarts, some of them remarkably well funded, and none of them has been able to scratch the surface, senator.

“…Americans have thousands of news, entertainment and educational programs to choose from that are available on countless television, radio and Web outlets.”
Yes. Some are liberal, many are FOX (check the news aggregators if you don’t believe me, and the remaining majority are unfunded bloggers regurgitating whatever they’ve already read, with limited original research. When the next big Democrat scandal breaks, don’t you want funded writers on the ground?

Get honest about the Budget
“Last year it got $420 million. As Congress considers ways to close the $1.6 trillion deficit, cutting funding for the CPB has even been proposed by President Obama’s bipartisan deficit reduction commission. Instead, Mr. Obama wants to increase CPB’s funding to $451 million in his latest budget.”

I’m not sure to call sour grapes or just disingenuous on this point. The TOTAL expenditure for public broadcasting, TV and Radio combined, would be .00001% for the 2012 budget year… this is how we’re going to fix the budget?

“”Sesame Street,” for example, made more than $211 million from toy and consumer product sales from 2003-2006.”

Why did you choose those years instead of, say, 2009 or 2010? Because it’s convenient. Because it includes highly unrepresentative years.

More importantly, what’s missing is the fact that nobody gets rich off of Elmo. All that money goes back to pro-literacy campaigns, building a rich, vibrant, free website for school teachers to share with children eager to learn while still having fun.

“Sesame Workshop President and CEO Gary Knell received $956,513 in compensation in 2008. With earnings like that, Big Bird doesn’t need the taxpayers to help him compete against the Nickelodeon cable channel’s Dora the Explorer.”

Are you insane? If this same CEO goes over to Nickelodeon, which he very well may at some point, he’ll earn 3-5 times as much for clearing a much lower bar. Conservatives have to admit that we can’t stifle CEO pay (that’s the mantra, right?), and likewise need to admit that this isn’t exorbitant by the standards set by the republican right, not by a mile.

DeMint Hates Citizen Funding
“Last year, for example, the Open Society Foundation, backed by liberal financier George Soros, gave NPR $1.8 million to help support the latter’s plan to hire an additional 100 reporters.”

So wait, the problem is that they should raise their own money, but the problem is that they are also raising their own money? Which is it, guy, because you can’t have it both ways.

Soros DID NOT donate the money to hire additional reporters, that’s an outright lie. The money was simply donated, and it went to general operations. PBS/NPR/CPB cut the number of reporters they employed last year, even with this generous contribution.

“When NPR receives million-dollar gifts from Mr. Soros, it is an insult to taxpayers when other organizations, such as MoveOn.org demand that Congress “save NPR and PBS” by guaranteeing “permanent funding and independence from partisan meddling,” as the liberal interest group did last month.”

How is donating money to a government sponsored public broadcasting entity anything short of patriotic? Trying to connect MoveOn.org to this isn’t just insulting, to use your word, but it’s plain crazy. If I donate millions to the FBI because I believe in security, and then another organization unrelated to me goes to congress and asks for guaranteed funding in the future for the FBI, isn’t that a good thing?

What planet have you been smoking the ganja on, Mr. Senator?

But Let’s Get Honest
If Senator Jim DeMint really wants an honest discussion from an honest media, let’s put in place the law Canada has that requires news broadcasters to be honest. That has kept the likes of FOX News and conservative radio out of Canada, because they know they’d be sued into oblivion and lose their broadcasting rights overnight for the outright lies so regularly espoused.

Challenge to Mr. DeMint
Senator DeMint, I invite you on GlossyNews for an interview to defend your comments, and I’ll send an email to your office today to request that you do as much.

You won’t come on to defend your positions, and you would never support a bill to demand honesty out of journalistic broadcasters. And why? It’s because Jim DeMint doesn’t want an honest, open discussion. That would be too damaging to his interests.

For all you can say for or against Barack Obama as President, there is one huge thing can be said in his favor. He has returned a forgotten key ingredient of crucial diplomatic etiquette to the forefront and that is RESPECT (say it loud just like Aretha Franklin did).

The idea of respect, (or, if that is too much to ask, then at least its little brother REGARD) has been trounced and forgotten in recent decades and even ridiculed. Continue Reading

Day after day, hour after hour, millions of Americans tune in willingly to hear political diatribe that is specially designed to align their political beliefs in a particular direction.

Amidst stunning eye-catching graphics and up-to-the-minute news bytes, various pundits slam opinions on every possible topic in the realm of today’s Americana and also slam anyone who dares venture an opinion alien, or, as is more likely the truth, threatening to their own. And all who appear and work on the channel must meet the approval of the Big Man running everything. Continue Reading

The revolution in Tunisia is one gone right. In an astonishingly short time a popular uprising in this small North African nation has brought thousands of disgruntled people out on the streets in such force that the dictatorial President Ben Ali has fled the country.

But the people are not stopping there. They are still in the streets demanding the removal of his cronies who are still hanging around in the dark corners waiting for the rebellion to settle down. This makes the Tunisians smarter than their contemporaries were in Romania twenty years ago. Continue Reading

Lets call this the case of two Williams.

It is a case study in the state of the journalism system in this country. Everyone has heard of the case of Juan Williams getting fired by NPR over some lukewarm comments he made about being nervous seeing traditional Muslims boarding the same airplane he was using. FOX News made sure the whole world knew about it. An interesting side to this is that there is a much more vivid story about another Williams that didn’t get near as much media play, but yet was more dramatic. Continue Reading

Politicians and pundits in recent years have harped on the tired adage of “real America”, though the term is as uncertain as climate change. That is to say, it’s a very clear metric, but staunch conservatives are just in plain denial. Real America is middle America, that vast, empty swath where pack animals and gays have learned not to tread in the open.

But there’s a bigger middle to America, one that isn’t restricted to population density and the ratio of American flags on Fords – it’s the political center of America. Not middle America, but Moderate America. Continue Reading