Who could have guessed?

The long-term rivalry between Celtic and Rangers is further dismantling a cherished atheist belief in real time:

Scotland’s first minister, Alex Salmond, who is facing a difficult election next month, blamed the violence narrowly on what he called a “lunatic element,” but Devine, the historian, sees a more sinister threat.

“I think it’s ironic that in a post-Christian, secular society, the problem seems to be intensifying,” he said, adding: “What’s happened over the last few days is unprecedented. There have been riots, but sectarianism in Scotland has never had this violence and criminality.”

Of course, the situation is only ironic if you still subscribe to the inaccurate notion that religion is a primary cause of group conflict and war. Even when religion happens to serve as the marker for the inter-tribal violence, that doesn’t mean it can’t be mitigating the situation.

No worries, he won’t date babykillers

It’s always somewhat amusing to see how some young women attempt to make the political personal, never realizing how it is guaranteed to come around and bite them in the behind. And I tend to doubt that the national championship- and Heisman trophy-winning multimillionaire pro quarterback is going to be overly concerned about the threat that some would-be babykiller would not date him due to his willingness to speak out against the legal murder of unborn children:

I realize I’m not the most reliable when it comes to dating guys who are totally on the up-and-up. But I draw the line at hardcore pro-lifers. I refuse to date a guy who doesn’t believe in a woman’s right to choose because I essentially view that as someone who believes women are too stupid to make decisions for themselves.

This woman is certainly too stupid to understand that a pro-life position has nothing to do with a belief concerning women’s inability to make decisions, (that would be Game and “disinclination” would be the more appropriate term), but rather, revolves around a belief that she has no right to pay people to kill other individuals. And while some pro-life men might be BETA enough to fall for this female posturing, the reality is that pro-choice women won’t think twice before dating pro-life men.

Even before I was a Christian, I was forthright about my anti-abortion position. It spawned numerous arguments, as you might expect, but it never once caused a woman to lose any interest in me. In fact, the fact that I was impervious to their waxing emotional tended to make me more attractive to them. As with most things that women say they want, politics that are in sync with her own are one of the many things that would be required of a BETA but will be jettisoned on sight should a sufficiently attractive man enter the picture.

Riding Occam’s Razor

It’s not hard to understand why Jerome Corsi’s new book from WND Books is the #1 book on Amazon and will be the #1 New York Times bestseller upon its release. Although this has surprised even the likes of the normally perceptive Instapundit, the logic is inescapable. Obama is hiding his birth certificate and other personal records because he has something to hide.

And, based on what we know of his family history, it is unlikely that he is eligible for the office he presently holds. It is perfectly possible for him to have been born in Hawaii and still be ineligible as a citizen who was not natural-born. This entire episode has been a good lesson in the limits of media power, as the entire power structure of both parties as well as the mainstream and conservative medias have been lined up against a single Internet site that just keeps asking the obvious questions. But no amount of evidence-free assertions and appeals to authority have managed to trump Occam’s Razor, which is why Corsi’s book is such a smash hit already.

Consider the two primary logical possibilities:

A) Obama is eligible and is hiding the evidence of his eligibility because questioning his eligibility makes his opponents look bad.

B) Obama is not eligible and is hiding the evidence of it because it proves he is not eligible.

Which makes more logical sense, especially in light of the fact that questioning his eligibility has now produced a #1 best-selling book and propelled a celebrity to an early pole position in the Republican primary? The logic of (A) doesn’t stand because its foundation is flawed. Questioning his eligibility actually makes his opponents more successful and popular. Therefore, Obama is either wildly inept in not releasing the information or he simply cannot afford to release it as per (B).

It is amusing to see how a savvy individual like Donald Trump have used the issue to his benefit whereas foolish politicians like Michelle Bachmann are so tied to the old power structure that they dutifully submit to the pressure of the groupthink. I once said that if Hillary wanted to nail down the presidency, all she had to do was come out against immigration. She didn’t and she blew it. In like manner, all a Republican candidate has to do to win the nomination is to be the first “serious” candidate to openly align himself with the Tea Party and the birthers, although a strong anti-immigration position would help secure the deal.

Of course, it will be a lot easier for Republicans to win in 2012 if they don’t cave on the debt ceiling, but since they will, they’ll be under a lot of fire as the economy and the deficit continue to worsen.