My first reaction to that, as an anthropologist, was this: “Hey, Imma let you say that now, but if you diss my Pygmies like that I’ll kick your ass.” In other words, I do find it rather condescending when western occidento-hetero-caucasoido-normative types take it on themselves to make blanket statements that some other group of people of which they know nothing are stupid. I understand the whole being annoyed at the bible thing, but this is where modern-day new atheists can be thoughtless when unpracticed in their philosophy and its application.

But it was only a Facebook comment.

My second thought was this: I never read the sports section of the newspaper, but last year when I came across a large fragment of a 30-year-old sports page from the local paper, hidden inside a wall, I read every word. Wouldn’t you? And the Dead Sea Scrolls are two thousand years old, and about a topic that is pretty much as interesting to me as hockey scores and basketball.

In the end, I went to see the exhibit, and I assure you, the part about the stupid shepherds is not only overwhelmingly outdone by other aspects of the scrolls, but in fact is rather inaccurate. The keepers of the scrolls were more like Moonies than shepherds, except when they were tour guides. That’s a topic I may address at another time.

So the other day I visited the Jeffers Petroglyphs site in southwestern Minnesota. That’s also a religious exhibit of sorts, if we assume (and we should) that the symbols pecked and carved into two-billion-year-old red quartzite played a role in various Native American cultural practices having to do with spirits, gods, afterlife, and so on. Jeffers has thunderbirds, lightning symbols, warriors doing battle with shamans, turtles, magic turtles, hands, bison (probably the extinct kind), atlatls, and more. The guides, polite and well informed caucasionormatives, describe various hypotheses about the symbols and who made them and why, play down the violent parts (maybe that one of the guy with the spear in his chest bleeding all over the place is all about the transition from boyhood to manhood?) and try to link the religious nature of the site to the presumed religiosity (or, at least, spirituality!) of the visitors. The prayer we make now at this site is enhanced by the thousands of years of others coming here to pray. And so on.

And both subjects have their holocaustic contexts. The Dead Sea Scrolls were probably kept by a Jewish religious sect, or at the very least, were part of a Jewish Renaissance following an exodus of sorts, and were a big deal in a Jewish world increasingly controlled and colonized by repressive and violent outsiders known today as heroes of Western Civilization. And the next two thousand years is, as they say, bloody history.

Jeffers is much older and diffuse in its cultural associations but was a sacred site to the Dakota (and others) at a time when the practice was to do war with the Indians, kill a lot of them, cut off some of their body parts to sell later in town as curios, or deflesh their bones, varnish them, keep them on display in your office, and to do all the killing in a way that maximized your votes, if you happen to be a politician. And, just to put this in perspective, I think we as a civilization came to abhor the Jewish Holocaust at the time it was revealed, in the mid 1940s. Most of the native body parts harvested, for example, during the Dakota Uprising (centered geographically near Jeffers) were returned between 1971 and 1990, and by force of law, not a sense of shame or propriety.

I recommend a visit to both. But don’t be a dick about it. Your ancestors have already pretty much taken care of that.

Hat Tip: Crooks and Liars

According to City Council Member Gary Schiff, “To open a microbrewery, the City of Minneapolis also makes you open a restaurant. That’s some pretty heavy overhead … the costs of running a restaurant means there is little money left to cover the costs of packaging and distribution, so locally-brewed beer never gets in stores.”

The Brew Beer Here Law has just passed the Minnesota House, and is working its way through the process. You can use this site to keep track of the bill (hat tip: Underground Brewing for that site).

According to a press release from Gary Schiff’s office:

A handful of local startup breweries are poised to open with the help of the new legislation, including Fulton Beer, Harriet Brewing, 612Brew, Longfellow Brewing, and Steel Toe Brewing.

“This is a great opportunity to build community,” said Jason Sowards, who hopes to open Harriet Brewing this year on Minnehaha Avenue. “Residents can come fill a growler and can come to the source of where their microbrew is being made. I get to meet the people who love my beer, and help boost the local economy. It cuts out the middleman and helps a local startup company at the same time.”

Craft brewing is a growing $7 billion dollar industry in the United States, with sales up 10% in 2009 according to the Brewers Association, the trade organization for the craft industry. “Changing our regulations can help Minneapolis capture our share of a growing industry, and help build a movement of Minneapolis-made products,” said Schiff.

Part of this event is a “track” (a sequence of sessions) run by the Skepchicks, called Skepchickcon. Here is the webpage for Skepchickcon.

Two of your QM bloggers, Stephanie Zvan and I, will be attending and participating in the con in various ways. (Here’s Stephanie’s schedule.) I’ll be participating in a number of Skepchickcon panels, as will Stephanie, and she will also be reading from her body of fiction in a separate event.

Some of you may know that Louis Shackleton, an honorary Skepchick, and blogger at Sex in the Public Square and Crowded Head, Cozy Bed, is trying to attend this year’s con as well, but he is a poor student with the usual financial difficulties. If you want to donate to a fund to bring Lou to the Twin Cities, click here. (Thank you, Jafsica, for arranging that.)

Anyway, here is my schedule for the con, including both events I’m participating in and events I’m planning to attend:

Thursday, July 1

5:00pm – 6:00pm
The Skepchicks are back!
Meet the blogging ladies from www.skepchick.org. With Amy Davis Roth, Bug Girl, Carrie Iwan, Maria Walters

8:30pm – 9:30pm
Skepticism 101
With Steve Thoms, Pamela Gay, Lois Schadewald, Greg Laden

Friday, July 2

9:30am – 10:30am
Science and the Internet
Exploring the sources for scientific information online. Where can you find real scientific information and where will you find bad research, bad data and bad findings? With Greg Laden, PZ Myers, G. David Nordley, Stephanie Zvan

2:00pm – 3:00pm
Stephanie Zvan Reading
Stephanie, author of “The End of Eternity” and “Among the Trees” reads from her work.

3:30pm – 4:30pm
Bulls**t Detection Kit: Why Pseudo-Science Doesn’t Deliver
Exploring pseudo science and why it is highly improbable. It is called pseudo science for a reason. With Ted Meissner, David Walbridge, Greg Laden, Steve Thoms, Bug Girl, Stephanie Zvan, Lois Schadewald

8:30pm – 9:30pm
Physics or Fantasy?
Perpetual motion machines, cold fusion, free energy and other fake science stories. Where do they come from and what does physics really allow? With Jennifer Ouellette, Pamela Gay, Stephanie Zvan, Lois Schadewald

11:00pm – 12:30am
Vilification Tennis
The show that violated fire codes in Harmonic CONvergence is back and they brought their interpreters with them! Enjoy their offensive insults in fabulous sign-o-rama (TM) and learn why they should never, ever, be given microphones. With Tim Wick

Saturday, July 3

11:00am – 12:00pm
Do Ghosts Really Exist?
The science of paranormal investigation. Is it possible that ghosts really exist and how can we prove it? With Stephan Stomberg, Dave Schrader, Rich Shepardson

12:30pm – 1:30pm
Science and the Media
Ways in which scientific findings are reported and distorted by the media. With Bridget Landry, Rachel Maccabee, Stephanie Zvan, Greg Laden

2:00pm – 3:00pm
Women as Skeptical Activists
With Maria Walters, Carrie Iwan, Pamela Gay, Jennifer Newport, Debbie Goddard

3:30pm – 4:30pm
Evolution Mythbusters
We’ll take a look at the common misconceptions of evolutionary theory. The panel will discuss why those misconceptions are wrong and how you can prove it. With Ted Meissner, Greg Laden, PZ Myers, Bug Girl, Lois Schadewald

Sunday, July 4

11:00am – 12:00pm
New Discoveries in Evolution
Our panel will discuss the latest exciting discoveries in the field of biology and what those discoveries are telling us about evolution. With PZ Myers, Greg Laden

12:30pm – 1:30pm
Smart vs. Intelligent
You don’t have to be a genius to think critically. With Ted Meissner, Maria Walters, Stephanie Zvan, Amy Davis Roth, Debbie Goddard, Pamela Gay

Hellier had previously accused the Meffert campaign of misconduct because a volunteer staffer with the campaign had modified Meffert’s Wikipedia entry. It is my understanding that people who have Wikipedia entries (and are alive and stuff) often correct errors or otherwise make appropriate modifications of the entries. Indeed, that is the how and why of Wikipedia itself. In this case, the staffer clearly updated the entry to be more detailed and more accurate. In “exposing” the staff member, Hellier also published private information about her on the MDE site, which is potentially problematic.

But the more interesting, if also much much dumber accusation Hellier made has to do with a Meffert ad using a clip of opponent Erik Paulsen babbling about something on the House floor. Hellier accuses Jim Meffert of violating House rules regarding the use of another member’s footage on the House floor in campaign ads. Such a rule does exist.

Luke Hellier is confused. Jim Meffert is not (yet) a member of Congress. He, like any other American citizen, is not bound by the House rules. The House rules are for sitting members of the House of Representatives (and the Senate has their rules, and so on).

I doubt very much that this is a case of incompetence or ignorance on the part of Hellier, though there is that possibility. I think, rather, that this is Hellier making stuff up in order to have something bad to say about Meffert, who, unfortunately (if you are a Republican) is not an easy person to make bad stuff up about.

But, I also hasten to add another suspicion I have: I think it is possible that Hellier did not think of this dirty trick all by himself. It has been tried before, in very similar circumstances, and as documented here. It would appear that Luke Hellier was following marching orders from HQ, or perhaps bumped into this particular dirty trick and decided to ape it.

Interestingly, what might (or might not) be an item from the Republican Playbook (accusing a Democratic candidate who is not in the House of violating a House rule) is in the Republican Playbook in a different form: Terry Lee, a Republican member from Nebraska apparently is in violation of said rule.

I should point something out regarding these House rules. If you read the relevant parts of the rulebook and not just the part quoted by Hellier, you can see why Meffert not only did not violate House rules (not being in the House and all) but that he also did not violate the spirit of the House rules. The point of the rules regarding a “General Prohibition Against Using Official Resources for Campaign or Political Purposes” is to avoid having members of the House use their official government budget to run for re-election. This stems form the old days when members of the House had, for instance, a “stationary budget” which allowed them to send “informational letters” out to their constituents, and used their travel budgets to stump on their campaigns, and so on and so forth. Not only is that misuse of government funds, but it also sets up a situation where powerful sitting members of the House or Senate can, essentially, manipulate campaign funds of other members. And so on.

But a person who does not hold elected office can grab a clip off C-Span (or whatever) and do pretty much anything with it. And they often do. And he did.

You would think Luke Hellier would know this. Well, he probably does. And now you do to, so he can’t fool you any more!

Here is a video of Bachmann, on the floor of Congress, explaining her dramatic and drastic new policy recommendations:

More details here.

Men and women can now get plowed on the cheap equally, or not at all: The Minnesota Department of Human Rights is reinforcing an old rule that “Ladies Night” drink specials amount to illegal gender discrimination.

….

The sobering news comes after [Minnesota Department of Human Rights] charged five Twin Cities bars for violating the state’s Human Rights Act by engaging in “gender-based pricing.” MDHR hasn’t yet named the bars, so don’t rush out tonight looking for them.

source

Most people would argue (and have argued) that “Ladies Night” is not discriminatory against men, but rather, a male plot to increase mating opportunities. Yet the law strikes down the practice for reasons that have very little to do with the actual nefarious (and arguably sexist, and thus discriminatory) reasons for the practice.

So, is this a step forward for civilization, and if so, does it count if it has happened for illogical reasons? From a purist-skeptic point of view (which may not be the best approach, see: this commentary), this law should be struck down because the reasoning is virtually exclusionary of the relevant logic.

You go read the article. But for those of you who are uncomfortable visiting such a site, imma give you a taste:

…Less than three months ago, our own son Joel was reading an article by Karl Rove, appealing for young people to enter the political arena. Joel… felt a spiritual urging to consider the possibilities in his own area. …

His opponent is a four-year incumbent, Keith Ellison – the first Moslem elected to US Congress. … Joel’s battle has been uphill in every way possible, but he believes that God was in this decision and miraculous doors have opened thus far. …

We ask for your prayers that God will use Joel to advance HIS Kingdom and help bring America back to her knees! Joel has passed phase one of this venture … Now, it is crucial that he pass through the second phase successfully, raising the large amount of money … Pray that the finance needed for this venture will miraculously come in from unexpected and solicited sources. Pray that the Word will be fulfilled…

For the Kingdom and for America,
Alan and Valerie Demos

The letter also refers to Matthew 10:18-20. You should probably know what that says because this an election and all:

And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles. But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

Okay…just so you know what or whom you’d be voting for.

But when we look at Paulsen’s record, it is not surprising that he has done this, because it turns out he is pretty much a clone of Michele Bachmann. Because I think this is a fairly important thing for Third District voters and Minnesotans to know, I’m reposting below an item from my other blog on this topic.

Who Is Erik Paulsen, Anyway?

Erik Paulsen is my representative to the U.S. Congress. This is his first term. He replaced a very centrist Republican (Jim Ramstad), who retired honorably. I worked for the Democratic Party (DFL, we call it in Minnesota) candidate, Ash Madia during that election. Ash was a good candidate, but he was inexperienced (which may or may not have been a factor) and not quite WASPy enough for this very WASPy district (which may or may not have been a factor), and although his politics matched those of the district’s constituents quite well (at least as well as the long-lasting Jim Ramstad’s politics did), he was probably viewed as too liberal, and people chose the “centrist” candidate Erik Paulsen.

But people are not always smart about these things (sorry, people, but I gotta be honest about that). Erik Paulsen was actually one of the more conservative members of the state Republican delegation in the Minnesota state House, far to the right of the average Third District voter, but when he ran for Congress, he disguised himself as a centrist and promised, more or less, to be a Ramstad Republican. But he’s not.

Paulsen opposed the “public option,” claiming that this would be a government takeover of health care. In fact, he claims that the current bill (which does not have public option) is a government takeover anyway. I think Representative Paulsen may not know what the word “option” means. Or “takeover.” Paulsen voted against the recently debated American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. He appears to be a global warming denialist. Paulsen voted against the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, designed to protect consumers. He appears to be against regular people.

He is anti-choice and anti-gay, based on his prior record in Minnesota.

So before he ran in the liberal-for-a-Republican district, he was as right-leaning as any member of the Minnesota Congressional delegation. Then he got liberal-ish. Then he got to Washington. So, where does he stand now?

According to him, he is not like that one particular other member of Congress from Minnesota, the infamous Michele “Investigate My Enemies” Bachmann. Paulsen explicitly separates himself from Bachmann by running an essay by Derek Wallbank on his web site that includes this:

Contrast [Paulsen's position on various issues] … with his neighbor to the north, Michele Bachmann. She has become a regular on Fox News and Sean Hannity’s radio show, emerged as a darling of the Tea Party right and is now called upon by conservatives across the nation to headline their rallies and fundraisers. Several in the Republican caucus are trying to copy her model for a stratospheric rise in the conservative esteem, but seemingly not Paulsen.

So Paulsen is maintaining his distance from Bachmann, as a continuation of the “I’m not too right wing for Plymouth (one of our centrist suburbs)” persona. But is it true? Is Paulsen different from Bachmann?

Well, it turns out that he isn’t except in one area. Paulsen is a bit more liberal on water conservation issues than Bachmann. Otherwise, he seems to be pretty much a Bachmann clone.

So far this year, the house has voted just under 300 times. Of those, Bachmann and Paulsen both voted (i.e, neither was marked as “not voting,” which we presume is absent from the House) a total of 282 times. Of those, they voted the same way 271 times. Michele Bachmann and Erik Paulsen voted the same way, according to this year’s voting record, over 96% of the time.

How were they different?

Paulsen favored recognizing the significant accomplishments of AmeriCorps, and supporting the goals and ideals of National Train Day. Bachmann voted against these things. Paulsen was in favor of reauthorizing the Federal Water Pollution Control Act’s Estuary Program, and two or three other water-related conservation bills. Apparently Michele Bachmann does not like natural water or trains.

They both voted against the Home Star Retrofit Rebate Program (aka “cash for caulkers”) and for Mother’s Day. They both voted for National Assistant Principals Week (those are usually the disciplinarians, right?) and against disaster relief and summer jobs. Generally, they voted against Obama, against regular people, against home owners, and in favor of selected ideals and corporate interests.

In virtual lockstep.

If you would like to see the voting record, here’s a PDF, compiled from data provided on Govtrack.us.

If you are a voter in the Third District who voted for Paulsen, you may already know about this. If you’re a Third Districter who voted for Ash Madia (and good for you if you did), then you really, really want to know about this. Either way, you may want to explore other options this year, because it appears that Representative Paulsen, aka “Son of Bachmann,” is running for re-election.

According to a press release from Meffert’s office:

Falconer brings extensive strategic and managerial experience to the Meffert campaign. Prior to serving as statewide political and field director for the R.T. Rybak for Governor campaign, he managed the 2009 Minneapolis DFL Coordinated Campaign, worked as Deputy Field Director for the 2008 statewide DFL Coordinated Campaign, and served as the Second District regional field director in 2006. Falconer grew up in Red Wing, MN, and graduated from St. Olaf College in Northfield, MN.

Meffert said, “Every member of Team Meffert is here because they believe in what we can accomplish for the people of this district, and Alex Falconer is no exception. Beyond his depth of experience and many professional strengths, Alex has a strong commitment to the values that drive this campaign and an ability to bring out the best in those around him. Alex will be a great manager and I am confident that he will help lead Team Meffert to victory in November.”

Ted Thompson, who has been coordinating the Meffert campaign, will continue in his role as senior advisor and strategic consultant to the campaign. Key staff members include finance director Berrett Gall, deputy finance director Elise Convy, communications director Kate Monson, and field director Brian O’Shea. Team Meffert also includes polling by Lake Research and mail and targeting by MSHC Partners, Inc.

Falconer said, “I am excited to join Jim and the hardworking staff at Team Meffert as we gear up to win this race. In this divisive political climate, Jim Meffert’s positive vision for creating jobs, supporting small businesses, and strengthening our schools is what the Third District needs. Jim has built a career on leading diverse groups toward common goals and building consensus among people who often disagree. That is the kind of leader who is going to get things done in Washington, and the kind of leader this district is ready to elect.”