•

This Tuesday the White House released their Mid-Session Review admitting they made a $2 trillion miscalculation in the size of the federal deficit that President Barack Obama’s borrow and spend policies would inflict on our nation. Heritage senior policy analyst Brian Riedl details the carnage:

  • While President Obama claims to have inherited the 2009 budget deficit, it is important to note that the estimated 2009 budget deficit has increased by $400 billion since his inauguration, and the whole point of the “stimulus” was to increase deficit spending to nearly $2 trillion based on the unproven notion that would it alleviate the recession.
  • The 22 percent spending increase projected for 2009 represents the largest government expansion since the 1952 height of the Korean War (adjusted for inflation). Federal spending is up 57 percent since 2001.
  • In 2009, Washington will spend $30,958 per household–the highest level in American history–and under President Obama’s budget, the figure will rise above $33,000 by 2019.
  • The White House brags that it will cut the deficit in half by 2013. The President does not mention that the deficit has nearly quadrupled this year. Merely cutting it in half from that bloated level would still leave budget deficits twice as high as under President Bush.
  • The public national debt–$5.8 trillion as of 2008–is projected to double by 2012 and nearly triple by 2019. Thus, America would accumulate more government debt under President Obama than under every President in American history from George Washington to George W. Bush combined.

From the Foundry, the blog of the Heritage Foundation

•

Word for the Day - iPod app

The Greek language of the New Testament is rich in detail, expressive and full of meaning, and, in A Word for the Day: Key Words from the New Testament, J.D. Watson brings New Testament Greek to life. Each devotion in this resource briefly presents a Greek Word (along with its Strong's number and transliteration) and offers a practical application for that particular word...

$9.95 from Olive Tree

~~~

HT: Rhoblogy

~~~

The Health Care Scavenger Hunt

By now, you probably know that House Democrats’ public plan for health reform will threaten your health care choices. But did you know that most members of the House haven’t even read the bill? Well, here at HandsOffMyHealth, we’ve read the 1,000-page plan. And we’ve learned that the House’s vision for “reform” irresponsibly adds more government to health care.

~~~

Honey House Naturals - I tried this on vacation and it was great.  I got the lip balm but passed on the bar...I wish now that I hadn't because it would be perfect to keep in my backpack because it can't spill.

~~~

And...a recipe for grain-free almond crackers.

• 4 Comments

•

Work starts Thursday...and I'm thinking of my co-workers, not the students.

  • "Got a full 6 pack, but lacks the plastic thing to hold it all together."
  • "He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier."
  • "He would argue with a signpost." (OK, this one's a student)
  • "A photographic memory but with the lens cover glued on." (OK, this one's me...it sounds like one I may have to use)
  • "If you see two people talking and one looks bored, he's the other one." (and I'm thinking of one person in particular)

• 1 Comment

•

(HT:  blog post from the Reformation21 blog and the upcoming start of the school year that makes it desirable for me to have a schedule and structure...Sunday is "Reformed Theology Day"...although looking at the "what I believe" page, there are some aspects that I haven't posted on...)

There are a lot of terms that I'm not sure are being used correctly - I'm not sure if I'm using them correctly.  But the way they're used does make a difference in how you see things.

(all definitions are from Wiki)

Determinism is the view that every event, including human cognition, behavior, decision, and action, is causally determined by an unbroken chain of prior occurrences.

Indeterminism is a philosophical position that maintains that some form of determinism is incorrect: that there are events which do not correspond with determinism (and therefore are either uncaused, or caused in a manner that the corresponding form of determinism does not allow).

so...if you believe in determinism, as strictly defined, given any circumstances, you cannot NOT make the decision that you must make, given all the factors that led up to that circumstance.

If you believe in indeterminism, it's all up for grabs.  You might make that decision or you might not.  You are a product of your past, but you are not bound by it.

Will - simply the ability to make a choice.

Free will - the ability to make a choice without force

Libertarian free will - the ability to make a choice with no outside constraints whatsoever.

These are varying degrees, but the differences are important.  Whether or not you "must" make a particular choice (based on determinism), it is still you making the choice.  Free will is further down the road, there may be history or constraints that you may or may not even recognize, but you are still not "forced" to make a particular choice.  With libertarian free will, there is no outside influence that would constrain any choice you might make.  Influence, yes...constrain, no.

Compatibilism (...) holds that the sovereignty of God and the free will of man are both biblical concepts and, rightly understood, are not mutually exclusive. The all-knowing God (who sees past, present, and future simultaneously from the perspective of eternity) created human beings (who have the subjective reality of making choices in the present that have consequences for themselves and others in the future) in such a way that both are true: God is ultimately sovereign and therefore must have at least permitted any choice that a human could make, but at the same time God is right to hold humans accountable because from their perspective within the confines of serial time, humans make moral choices between good and evil. (from Theopedia, through Wiki)

Incompatibilism takes two different forms...at either end of the compatibilist spectrum.

compatibilism must be false because both the sovereignty of God AND the free agency of man cannot be true.

thus (choice 1) in order for man to have libertarian free will, God must choose to not take control over man's choices...

or...

(choice 2), God is sovereign over all, thus man must not have the ability to make choices of the will.

This is an important question of theology for one who studies Reformed theology.  Where on the spectrum do I fall?

My belief is:  since Scripture teaches that God IS sovereign over all AND man makes choices, both good and evil, then some sort of compatibilism must be true.

•

Between people who do bad things...and people who are just plain bad.

Okay...two people broke into a house and stole a laptop computer...

on the computer they discovered movies, stills and IM's involving children....so...

they turned it over the police.

These two people were doing a bad thing...and discovered a worse thing...so they did the right thing.