The Jindal Revolution

jindalrevolution.jpg

The new requirements will force all state legislators, as well as most other elected and appointed officials around the state, to disclose all sources of income, real estate holdings and debts over $10,000. (Judges are exempted.) Lawmakers and executive branch officials will no longer be able to get contracts for state-financed or disaster-related work. Lobbyists will also have to disclose their sources of income and will be limited to spending no more than $50 per elected official, per meal; splitting the tab, say among other lobbyists or legislators, will also be prohibited.
- Louisiana Governor Pierces Business as Usual – New York Times

He didn’t get everything he (and we) wanted but this is real progress.  If he keeps going the way he’s started, talk of a Presidential run in eight years might be realistic.

Are you too sinful to worship?

There have been times I didn’t want to go to church because I just didn’t want to be there for worship. When I had been sinning deliberately (is there any other way for a saved person to sin?) and felt that I just wasn’t repentant enough… and in those circumstances, it just felt wrong to go and sing praises to a holy God, as if I were worthy to do so. And it’s awkward and attention gathering to go and not sing. So I’d go late, or stay home. And consequently deny myself an avenue of grace, because the act of true worship is the best possible reminder that salvation has absolutely nothing to do with any activity on my part. This John Piper article, Can I still worship God even though I’m not entirely “pure and upright”? was a timely reminder.

If being completely “pure and upright” was prerequisite to worship then we could never worship and we could never go to heaven. So when we read Psalm 24:4—”clean hands and a pure heart”—we need to have a category for sinful blamelessness, or unrighteous righteousness, or a perfect sinner.

It's not the crime, it's the cover up?

Congress seeks to prosecute Roger Clemens for perjury -

Congress yesterday asked the Justice Department to launch a criminal probe into whether Roger Clemens committed perjury when he gave questionable testimony about using performance-enhancing drugs.

Luckily, there’s no national security issue Congress should be working on instead. Since Congress has so much free time, I wish they’d get after my neighbor – his dog barks constantly and it’s driving me crazy. And why aren’t traffic lights synchronized?! When you hit one green light, if you’re doing the speed limit you should be able to just cruise through the subsequent lights! And please, PLEASE can we regulate people wearing spandex? Spandex is a privilege, not a right. Good grief, if you’d only seen this woman in the grocery store the other day… horrifying. You could prance her through the interrogation rooms at Gitmo and terrorists would weep and spill all in exchange for making her cover herself up. Come on, Congress, it’s not like you’ve got anything more pressing to do, or like you care about restricting yourself to things you have, you know, legitimate authority over.

Even More Islamic Math

Hot Air’s Quote of the day is:

“Seven percent of 1.3 billion leaves us with . . . 91 million radical Islamists. And to think we were concerned!”

Well, yes. I’ve got a category (The Tiny Percentage of Radical Islamists) dedicated to posts with that sort of math, and I’m quite sure I wasn’t the first person to think of it. I hope the concept finally gets some traction. Since this study came up with 7% (as opposed to the UK study that came in at 13%), let’s run with those numbers and see if they can be so cavalierly dismissed.

Since it’s unlikely the entire 7% (again, that’s 91 million) of these “political radicals” would actually do anything but grumble amongst themselves about the Great Satan or at most, join Islamic Rage Boy at a flag burning, let’s guess only 7% of them would be willing to perform a terrorist act. That’s 6,370,000 people.

Now lets guess how many would be effective - sticking with the 7%, that’s 445,900 effective terrorists, if the 7% of the 7% of the 7% estimate is accurate.

All of those people aren’t going to have the connections needed to perform a large scale terrorist attack, so take it to the next 7% level. That would be 31,213 political radicals who are willing, can act effectively, and have the connections to conduct a large-scale terrorist attack. All theory, of course. The only number we can be sure of is that 7% in the study who actually admitted their views. But out of 91 million people who believe, I think it’s quite reasonable to conclude that there are 31,000 would would and could act on their beliefs.

Now let’s hand it to the Department of Homeland Security and guess that they monitor 93% of these terrorists in spite of the fact that Congress hinders them for political gain and the media proudly exposes legal, effective, classified programs – the 7% that goes unmonitored is 2,178 people. Is is possible or reasonable to conclude there are 2,000 people in the world with the desire and ability to conduct a major terrorist attack? If the answer is yes, are a mere 2,100 people worth bothering with?

Nineteen took down the WTC and hit the Pentagon. One person with the right chemicals or germs in Grand Central Station could effectively shut down New York for weeks, costing thousands of lives and millions or even billions of dollars.

Over 8,000 aliens are currently taking flight lessons, being granted FAA certifications and are flying planes without undergoing a required background check by TSA.*  Any chance even 7% of them  – 560 people – mean us harm?   If you think that number is ridiculously high,  reduce it again – 7% of that is 39 people.  Nothing to worry about, I’m sure.appeasement.jpg

Dalia Mogahed, Esposito’s co-author, says, “A billion Muslims should be the ones that we look to, to understand what they believe, rather than a vocal minority.” How right she is. We need to find out from one billion rational human beings why they largely refuse to stand up for humanity and dignity instead of cowering in the face of fascist thugs. They’re the only Westerners this study challenges.

Pulling some more numbers out of my hat – business networkers live by the “300 Rule” – everyone knows at least 300 people. So that means that there are 653,400 who could potentially turn our theoretical 2,178 effective terrorists in. We’re relying on those family members, friends, co-workers, and acquaintances. Someday maybe we’ll see an Islamic Neighborhood Watch which will stop terrorism at its source, but not until the consequences for silence are worse than the bondage in which this vast majority of moderates choose to live. Alternatively, maybe we’re just fooling ourselves. Maybe it’s passive agreement, not passive disagreement, that causes their silence. Time will tell.

[*Added after I saw it in the headlines at Hot Air.]