112 Cars Burnt Each Day...

112 cars burnt a day.
15 attacks on police and emergency services personnel a day.
Almost 3000 police officers injured.

You'd think those statistics for this year would refer to some place like Iraq or Afghanistan. They actually refer to France. The attacks are perpetrated by Muslim youth.

Some people have been arguing that this violence is caused by the poverty and despair of the Muslim youth in France, that poverty is a prime motivator for social violence, and that the answer to it all is surely more welfare and assistance. That theory doesn't hold water when you consider that the vast, overwhelming majority of the poor in this world do not seek to address their circumstances by engaging in violence. Rather, most violence on a large-scale such as what's happening in France tends to be orchestrated and fomented by ideologically driven agitators. That's pretty evident when you take a quick look at history, regardless of the country.

So, what's happening in France, and whatever happened to that so-called religion of peace we all know and love as Islam? (If you didn't pick up my sarcasm in the last sentence - yeah - I was being sarcastic.)

Quiet Lives or Something Else?

There's a passage in the New Testament advising that we should lead quiet, peaceable lives. Some days I'm all for that; other days, though, I just wanna find a bullhorn loud enough to reach the whole world (or at least California) and do some hollering.

What does leading a quiet life mean? Does it mean you stay out of politics, that you don't make waves, that you don't do anything that shakes up the status quo? Does it mean you don't challenge people in how you live and what you say?

I really don't buy that. There must be a semantic issue here - some sort of definition or word that means something entirely different in our context versus the context of the ancient culture from where that thought originated.

I suppose a contented little fellow in the middle of Nebraska could one day write an essay on Balkan politics that could, theoretically, shake up the face of US foreign policy. Or he could wake up one night with a brand new theory of economics that alter banking and lending as we know it. That certainly wouldn't be a quiet life, yet he'd be leading a quiet life.

Eh. Whatever. Where's that bullhorn?

I Can't Spell "Bougainvillea"

I'm not sure how to spell that word. I might have gotten it right, but I have a suspicion that I didn't. I suppose I could go look it up on Dictionary.com, but I'm not going to. Sometimes, you just have to let a few things slide, like not picking up every single toy and tupperware item strewn around the house by our rampaging 11-month-old.

But I did plant one of those plants yesterday at the back of the house. It has a sort of orangey-peach colored blossom and the hope is that it will climb the side of the house and turn it into a painting.

Besides, Winston Churchill once remarked that only very boring people spell a word just one way. I suspect he's mostly wrong on that, but only just mostly.

Speaking of Churchill (apologies for digressing so much), he was once at a dinner party and found himself seated next to a duchess that he despised. Apparently, the feeling was mutual because they ignored each other all through the evening. Finally, the duchess turned to him and said, "Winston, if I was your wife, I would poison you!" He replied, "Madame, if I was your husband, I would gladly take the poison!"

Global Warming - Yes? No? Yes? No!?

Okay, so there's a piece on DrudgeReport today that says the average temperatures during September 2006 are 0.7 degrees cooler than the 20th century average. And, of course, we have snow turning the Northeast into an outdoor icebox.

On the other hand, we have Al Gore yodelling in the wings that the world is about to burn up like a magnesium flare.

One of the unsettling things about the global warming debate is the potential effect on third world countries and the poor if the United States goes through with anti-global warming initiatives such as capping emissions, altering refrigerant technologies, etc. Basically, the poor get it in the neck. Third world economies wouldn't be able to keep up with those sorts of technological shifts. They wouldn't be able to afford the new imports. That would affect such things as refrigeration in any number of African countries, which would in turn repercuss on health issues.

It's interesting how liberal thought affects the poor. Case in point above: the politics of global warming. Another case in point is the liberal push against genetically modifed crops such as corn and wheat. Those crops can be modified to become drought-resistant (ie., grow 'em in the Sahara), contain higher nutrient levels, etc., yet, the rich liberal environmentalists around these parts says, "Heavens above - no! We must have pure crops!" That view modifies policy in Washington DC, which in turn means the guy growing stuff on the edge of the Sahara doesn't get a better shot at life for his family and his community.

It'd be interesting to analyze classic liberal thought and see how it affects day to day life of a typical communitiy out in Cameroon, or some other place like that.

Yeah, I've got it in for liberals today. Dunno why - I just feel ornery.