As-Salamu Alaykum

Catholics have a pope. If he tells them all to wear blue shirts you will hear about it. You will probably even see a few people wearing blue shirts. Jews have not had any central leader since the temple was destroyed. There are community leaders all over the place and influential organisations. Israel's Chief Rabbinate is generally regarded as the highest governing body, though many people in other countries disagree. If they tell everybody to wear blue shirts you might hear about it. I'm not sure how many people would actually do it. Muslims have different leaders in different countries. Iran has their ayatollah but he is mostly a political leader. He does not hold much sway outside of Iran. If he told everybody to wear blue shirts you would probably never hear about it and it is even less likely you would see anybody do it.

Thou Shalt Not Proselytise

In my experience the least tolerant are the atheists. They will often accuse anybody with a different point of view of “bible thumping” even when such people never quote their particular bible or push any belief. The atheists always seem much angrier than anybody else. Online at least. People often behave very differently offline. Even the most fire and brimstone Christians cannot match the hateful online rhetoric of some atheists.

I do not need anybody telling me that Jesus died for my sins and I do not believe that he did. But the people who say so usually also tell you to have a nice day and are much friendlier than the atheists who blame anybody with faith for all that is wrong with the world. If religious people are so judgemental and want everybody to believe what they believe and the atheists are supposed to be the opposite then should they not be more open minded toward different beliefs?

Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea

The other day I crashed 6 helicopters into a corvette, killing a total of 21 passengers, 8 flight crew, 2 ground crew and sometimes myself. Not to mention destroying $20 million in equipment. Fortunately, this was all done in a simulator.


 
This is how it looks live. As you can see there is very little margin for error.

Sometimes You Should Shoot the Messenger

Nixon was more qualified to be president than Kennedy in 1960. He took his work more seriously and earned everything he had, as opposed to Kennedy’s sense of entitlement. Kennedy was barely younger but looked much younger and he was far more comfortable in front of the camera. He probably won because of the televised debates.

Carter was much younger than Ford and had a full head of hair at the time. Ford was winning the election until they went on TV together. When Carter was the incumbent he was winning until he went on TV with Reagan, a former actor. Reagan won in a landslide.

Dukakis lost to the first Bush largely because he seemed distant on TV. He was also a hairy Mediterranean immigrant’s son running against a Connecticut WASP from a political dynasty.

The first Clinton was a generation younger than the first Bush and looked a lot better on TV. He was more charming and more articulate. Women wanted to sleep with him. And many did. Nobody wanted to sleep with Bush. Clinton easily won.

Obama looked young, charming, non-threatening, articulate. McCain looked old, crippled, sometimes mean. Who did you expect to win?


Gordon Brown's official Downing Street portrait