I’m not sure why the Bush administration doesn’t speak up more for the interests of manufacturers. Wealth and growth goes to where people make/produce tangible things. Look at Michigan in the 1940’s-60’s when auto manufacturing was hot. Michigan was one of the wealthiest and most envied states in the US. Look at China currently. They make stuff, their economy is rocketing.

When looking at major empires/economies in history, one notices that these empires grew powerful when they had a strong manufacturing base (building war materials, tools, parts for infrastructure, etc.). As those empires expanded, they often shifted the manufacturing to their conquered lands because of cheaper (often slave) labor. Sound familiar? The major empires like Rome eventually fell because of poor leadership, huge financial deficits, fighting expensive and unnecessary wars, and because their economic core (manufacturing) was no longer there to sustain the standard of living people had grown accustomed to. It’s a good thing nothing like this is happening in America today.

Historically, economies that produce tangible goods grow strong, healthy and wealthy. America was at its strongest when manufacturing was hot in the 1940’s-60’s. I don’t care what the pro-globalization folks say, our economy cannot stay prosperous with retail, banking, health care and tourism being the foundation of the economy. What is being produced in these industries? They are merely recirculating money made elsewhere. For our economy to pick up, we must be MAKING goods that people want locally and globally. But our current federal administration curiously continues to give competitive trade advantages to questionable foreign countries instead of fighting for our own manufacturing base. Why?

It will be interesting to see if/when the national economy starts feeling the pinch of massive trade imbalances, reckless personal and national debt, and the gutting of the manufacturing base. It can’t go on forever. We will have to pay for this eventually, and it will hurt.

For America to stay strong in the future, manufacturing should be protected and supported. Auto suppliers should diversify their products to include parts for other industries (computer parts, wind turbines, aircrafts, etc.). But we should never accept that manufacturing is on its way out. That would make America extremely weak in the long term.

Granholm’s plan for economic recovery was basically a laundry list of everything the Republicans have been demanding (cf. the utter lack of surprise on Mike Bishop’s face). It was also everything that Dick DeVos promised two years ago. DeVos must have been screaming at the TV and wondering why he wasn’t elected. I know I still am.

The news reported last night that despite the cross-aisle huggy-huggy-smoochy-smoochy language of Tuesday night, there’s still a pretty sharp divide between the parties on matters of the budget and tax cuts, so that a lot of the bipartisan language seems to be just talk at this point.

It’s worth noting that almost nobody in the chamber cheered during the NCLB section. That seems to be generally regarded as awful, awful legislation.

If a talking snake didn’t convince a naked lady to eat some bad-voodoo fruit, how is it that we are all infected with her sin and therefore (somehow) deserve to be burned alive for all “eternity”?

The Bible is supposed to be the Word of God. Why should it be necessary for humans to come up with “a hermeneutical method” to figure out what an omni-everything God actually meant? Why isn’t the Bible the most straightforward, concise, precise, insightful book ever written? Why must theologians and other apologists construct a complex framework of rationalizations to deal with every question?

As much as I hate what the fundies are doing to our country, I have to give them credit for actually sticking to the text of their holy book. We can agree that their attitude (”The Bible says it happened in six days, so that’s what happened! Lalalalalala I can’t hear you.”) is mind-blowingly irrational, but you must concede that it is based upon simple, non-convoluted devotion to the Bible.

By contrast, I really can’t respect the way that liberal Christianity handles logical challenges. Any reason-based comments (e.g., but not limited to, science vs. Genesis and the false promises regarding prayer) are met with rationalizations: oh, that part isn’t literal, it’s metaphorical, you’re not interpreting it hermeneuticatastically, you need to understand the context of the culture, our minds are too limited, you need to be aligned with God’s plan, God works in mysterious ways, thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test, ask God when you get to heaven, blah blah, blah blah, freaking-A blah blah!

I have a lot of respect for both of you — you’re intelligent, educated, successful professional guys. I simply cannot figure out why you’re still clinging to a Bronze Age belief system designed to frighten and control primitive, superstitious people.

Regarding the original topic of prayer, I should have passed along this link before:

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/prayer.html