Atlas Shrugged II trailer

And I didn't even see the first one.



I did read the book, though.

Here's a three part series which explains the movie, which illustrates Ayn Rand's philosophy.  Objectivism stands in sharp contrast with the philosophy of post modernism.  I tend to prefer Ayn Rand's point of view, over the more prevalent philosophy that I think is plaguing modern society.  To put it bluntly, I think it would be better off if we all said to hell with post modernism.



part 2



Part 3

Rush Limbaugh TV- Secret Daschle Memo Details Lies

Early nineties Rush Limbaugh TV show.

The description of the video from YouTube:

(From rushlimbaugh.com)
Correcting Tom Daschle's lies and distortions have taken up a lot of Rush's time lately, but we've had our eye on the Puffster since long before his days as illegitimate Senate Majority Leader. Yes, America's Truth Detector has been "doing the job the mainstream press used to do" when it comes to this most liberal son of South Dakota since the days of the Neil's Liquor Store memo.

We brought you that four-point memo on the June 26, 1995 edition of Rush Limbaugh the Television Show. A dim-witted DNC staffer accidentally left the super-secret communiqué behind at Neil's, and some EIB operatives faxed it to home base. The memo detailed Tom Daschle's plan to lie about Republicans, hurt the poor with class warfare, and moan about problems rather than solve them - in short, to do exactly what Daschle has been doing ever since.

"It is a rehash of the problems the Democrats think they have," Rush said of this memo, which included a Mark Mellman poll showing the nation clearly favoring the GOP approach to governing. He then went on to pick apart the memo point by point, just as Rush has picked apart Daschle's mean-spirited, partisan attacks ever since.

Now, you know this memo would've been splashed all over the New York Times front page had it come from a Republican staffer. But you never heard a word about Neil's Liquor Store until Rush broke the story. Is there any wonder Rush is the success he is with a mainstream press that refuses to report all the facts? Enjoy this clip, folks, and keep tuned to the EIB Network for the other side stories like this.

Comment:

The more things change, the more they stay the same.  You could run this show today and the only things that are different would be the names.



Update:

Another video which struck me at how our culture has gone nuts--- even 20 years ago.

The part was where the mountain lion orphaned cub got more help from people than the children who lost their mom to a mountain lion attack. Sick, sick, sick




Update:

One more and I'm done on this post.

Rush Limbaugh TV- Capital Gains Mania



This is so true that it ought to be common sense, but the media and academia has people so confused, that too many people probably don't know this or recognize it as being true.

That includes, by the way, the President of the United States, who doesn't get this. What is so hard about this?

Morris: Real Unemployment Rate Is 11.4%

www.dickmorris.com

Fitzgibbon notes that the unemployment rate is being held down by 368,000 new people who have dropped out of the labor force. He says “Labor Force Participation rate, which has fallen sharply to 63.5%, a new 31 year low reading.”

I think it was the comedian Flip Wilson who said if you don't put a coin in the slot, you can't win the jackpot.  Same with the Republicans.  The Republicans oddly enough, don't seem all that intent on winning the jackpot, so they consistently refuse to put the coin in the slot.  The "coin" in this analogy is an ideological critique of the Obama Administration, as indicated in a previous post.

Put the coin in and let's see what happens, comrades.  That is, if you are really serious.

Are Republicans Fooling Themselves?

nro

Yet I worry that the Romneyites are fooling themselves. Technocrats and fixers from a state where liberals dominate, they are neither inclined or prepared to show how the Obama Democrats are slowly redefining American exceptionalism into the European social democratic dream. Romney may squeak by on bad unemployment numbers and gentle coaxing of undecideds, but patriotic veneer the Democrats have managed to slap on their leftism is worrisome. If Obama wins, it will be because we allowed him to get away with it.

I think the public is vastly confused and don't really know which end is up.  This isn't calling the public stupid, but, rather ignorant, and it is a type of enforced ignorance of the ruling class.  The ruling class includes the Republicans, by the way.  That's the point of the article.  Republicans are just going through the motions of being an opposition party.  Just like Krugman says they should be.

Thoughts on Monetary Policy

With respect to the last post, I'd like to make some further comments.

Two aspects of the video stand out as proposals for monetary reform:
1. Who controls the money supply? The video says the government should.
2. What kind of leverage in the banking system? The video says no leverage at all.

With respect to the first, I think the government already controls the money supply even though the Federal Reserve is said to be private. If it were truly private, the profits from operations would go to private individuals, but it goes to the Treasury. Therefore, it isn't truly private.

The video makes a big deal out of the debt, and it is true that debt is a problem because there's too much of it. However, when the government monetizes the debt, which is precisely what this video advocates, the interest on the debt goes to the Federal Reserve, which, in turn, remits it to the Treasury. The debt, therefore, goes out of one pocket into another. Both pockets belong to the government, so there is not net exchange.

For the other debt that isn't monetized, the interest goes to private hands. It is this that video proposes to do away with. I'm not so sure that is a good idea. Debt is a way to impose discipline upon the system. If money can be printed to fund everything, what reason would the government have to impose economies upon operations? When there are debts, the government is required to set priorities and behave responsibly. Therefore, I am against the removal of debt from the system.

The government still controls the system and can impose inflation upon its creditors. There's no loss of control. For all intents and purposes, we already have the "greenback system" that the video speaks so well of. In my opinion, that has its limitations and is not a panacea by any means.

As for the second proposition, how much leverage in the banking system, I'd tend to want to focus in on that a bit more than the first. Why? Leverage is inherently risky. With less leverage, there's less risk. With no leverage at all, there's little risk. But once again, do you really want to go that way and remove all risk to the system? No risk also means little reward.

By the way, the Federal Reserve already has authority over leverage or reserve requirements. The reserve requirements, which means how much the bank must keep on hand to pay depositors on demand, determines the leverage. Economists like to call it the "multiplier effect". As leverage increases the multiplier effect also increases as the reciprocal of the reserve requirement. For example, if the reserve requirement is 10% of deposits, the multiplier effect would be 1/.1 or 10. That means the banking system is leveraged ten to one. That is a lot of leverage and it may be the amount of leverage currently in the system.

If you want to reduce risk of financial meltdowns, you may want to adjust the risk by having the Federal Reserve increase the reserve requirements. This reduces leverage and makes the system a bit more stable. But to go all the way and require 100% would eliminate all risk to the system. Would this be a good idea? To be honest, I don't know what would be best. The video showed some examples of no leverage and extolled its advantages. I'd think this would require some extensive study in order to determine if this is the way to go or not. I'm not so sure that the entire system should be run this way.

In short, the proposals indicated in the video are not too far from what we already have. The government has effective control over the money supply, and the amount of leverage in the system. What is different is the removal of all leverage from the system and all debt. This should not be jumped into without carefully examining the consequences, which may not be what the authors of the video believe.

The Secret of Oz (The Federal Reserve)

Uploaded by iHelo58 on Mar 26, 2011

The Secret of Oz: Solutions For a Broken Economy

What's going on with the world's economy? Foreclosures are on the rise, unemployment is skyrocketing and this may only be the beginning. Is it possible that solutions to the world's economic problems were embedded in one of the most beloved children's stories of all time, "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz?"

Comment:

This coincides with what Milton Friedman taught. The quantity of money determines the economic fortunes of a nation.

Also, it says let the big banks fail. That coincides with what Michelle Malkin said when she denounced TARP.

Branco Cartoon – God and Man at the DNC

With apologies to... hmmm. Who did that famous pic? Let's say DaVinci at the Sistine Chapel. No! It was Michelangelo. At least I got Sistine Chapel right.

Reprinted by permission as long as linked to the source (click the caption)

Jobs report

Spinmeisters will claim that this was a good report, but it sucked.  There are fewer people working even though the population is increasing.  How can that be good?  Anyway, here's the household report.  The spinmeisters will cite the establishment report, but this is the report I prefer, because it is hard to spin.

Yes, the population is getting older, but young people are struggling. So, how can you spin that?

Hard to find something positive in these numbers.

Roger and Me ( full video)

This is a propaganda flick.  The intention of the flick is to demonize the CEO of General Motors and make everybody feel sorry for the people who had lost their jobs and their homes.

It is successful in doing this.  Even for someone like me who is definitely not with the unions.  I feel really sorry for those people--- although this is 30 years old.

Anyway, this is not a constructive way to approach a real problem.  That's the trouble with propaganda.  It is not a constructive way to solve problems.  It just makes people feel a certain way that the manipulator wants them to feel.  The manipulation is intended to do something though, and in this case, I'd say it is intended to help the Democrats.  It also gives Michael Moore a name and makes a lot of money for Michael Moore.  I'd like to see one constructive thing that Michael Moore ever did for anybody.



Roger & Me from Turkestana on Vimeo.

Staggering Number of Bones of Extinct Ice Age Animals Found in Mexico

ibtimes.co.uk  via Free Republic

“The skeletal remains of extinct animals, some of which measure up to 1.60 m, corresponding to ribs, vertebrae, skulls, jaws, defences (fangs), horns and shells, of species such as glyptodont, mastodon, mammoth, camel, horse, deer, bison and possibly other as yet unidentified,” [emphasis added]

These type of animals in North America?  Especially in Mexico?  "Staggering" isn't an exaggeration at all.

By the way, a lot of dumb comments on the Freeper site.

Obama Doubles Down On Liberalism

 Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

Morris said the president didn't achieve what he needed to achieve for re-election.  He declares that the Republicans will win this election.

But what does it all mean?

I'm getting kinda bored with it all.  An awful lot of bullshit all around, if you ask me.

Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 10 (#1)

A 10 part series:



the entire series, in reverse order:

Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 9
Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 8
Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 7
Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 6
Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 5
Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 4
Top10 BEST War Movies, Part 3
Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 2
Top 10 BEST War Movies, Part 1

Lots of videos to watch.  None of these glorify war, in case you were wondering.

Very suspicious of Obama

Yes, I am.

As I wrote previously, on the White House page, Obama has listed as one of his "accomplishments" as supplying US troops through Russian territory:

Over the last 18 months, the Obama Administration has expanded the volume of supplies being shipped to our troops in Afghanistan through the Northern Distribution Network (NDN), thanks in part to Russia’s agreement to allow ground and air transit for troops and supplies for Afghanistan through its territory. At present, 30 percent of supplies to our troops in Afghanistan travel over the NDN, and of this cargo, 65 percent of the supplies being routed through the NDN transit through Russia.

I suspect the purpose of doing this was to checkmate any Israeli attempt to take out Iran's nuclear facilities.  For if Israel attacks, what prevents Russian from discontinuing this service?  If this service is discontinued, what would that mean?  It would mean that US troop strength in Afghanistan will run into severe problems.  I don't know if this can be said to have created a hostage type situation, but if it hasn't, it has gone in that direction.

That's why I find the lack of response to this on the right to be puzzling.  They should be screaming bloody murder.

I haven't hit harder on this because of this.  That would put me on the fringe, you might say.  Let's just say that I am very suspicious, and leave it at that.

Inside Nature's Giants: Great White Shark

I'm bored with the news. Here's a change of pace.

Broadcast (2010) The experts travel to South Africa to dissect a 900kg, 15 foot long great white shark. Comparative anatomist Joy Reidenberg uncovers the shark's incredible array of senses, including the ability to detect the electro-magnetic field given off by other creatures.

THE THREE STOOGES Trailer - 2012 Movie - Official [HD]

Wright Brothers Test Flight - Ft Myer (1909)

Sixty years after this film was made, men were walking on the moon. Now, it is more than 40 years after walking on the moon, and what has been accomplished?

Learning to fly is a real thing. Bits and bytes on a computer is virtual--- which one of these is likely to prevail in the real world?

The computer industry may be popular, but it has its limitations.

Verdict is in: Obama levels more personal attacks - John F. Harris and Alexander Burns - POLITICO.com

Verdict is in: Obama levels more personal attacks - John F. Harris and Alexander Burns - POLITICO.com

A crabby, negative campaign that has been more about misleading and marginal controversies than the major challenges facing the country? Barack Obama and Mitt Romney can both claim parenthood of this ugly child.

Obama and his top campaign aides have engaged far more frequently in character attacks and personal insults than the Romney campaign.

When you've got little to run on in terms of your own accomplishments, then going negative and personal is your only option.

Brief word on addiction

A short research project yields the result that if yours truly has an addiction, it may be towards information.  Yeah, an information junkie.  Is this a real problem?  Don't know. But addicts are always in denial about their problem.  If this is a real problem for me, most likely I would never realize it.  That's the nature of the beast.

So much for that.

Morris: Clinton Was Like A Good Lawyer Defending A Guilty Client

Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

Verdict:  Didn't help Obama.  But it was a nice try.

I didn't watch it.  The Democrats are dead to me.  Total waste of electrons and time.

ALBERT EDWARDS: 'The Vice-Like Grip Of The Bear Will Soon Squeeze The Hope From Their Gasping, Broken Bodies'

businessinsider

Gee, tell us what you really think.

Edwards is particularly worried by the latest U.S. durable goods report:

But the metric which really stood out for me over recent weeks was a truly awful US durable goods report. For although the headline July data rose by over 4%, both mom and yoy, the core measure of new orders has slumped (core is capital goods orders excluding the volatile aircraft component). Core orders fell 4% in July mom and 6.2% yoy. July was not a one off. This is now the fourth month out of the last five that core new orders have fallen sharply and is entirely consistent with the rapidly deteriorating profits backdrop.

Here's a chart that supports ( kind of ) his opinion

businessinsider

Far be the case that I would support Obama, but this doesn't look like a doomsday chart to me ----yet.  Not a good time for the markets to roll over for Sir Barry Clusterf**k.

Is High Speed Rail Irrelevant?

Via Meadia

Researchers at Colombia University took a look at what would happen if we started relying on autonomous or semi-autonomous cars equipped with sensors and/or intervehicular communications systems, and the increase in efficiency is fairly incredible, simply due to the fact that cars can safely travel closer together. When traveling at 100 kph, if all vehicles on the road are simply equipped with adaptive cruise control, highway capacity can safely increase by a factor of 1.4. And if all vehicles on the road are equipped with both adaptive cruise sensors and communication, capacity can be increased by a factor of 3.7.

The technology is available today, he says.

Morning Summary 9/6

There are a couple of things I want to start off with:

1. I watched Matrix Reloaded last night and,
2. I thought an awful lot about what a huge mistake it was for the Obama Administration to resupply the US occupation forces in Afghanistan through Russia

With respect to #1, I know I said I wouldn't watch it.  I changed my mind.  It was an iffy type of decision.  It got changed more than once.  I do that sometimes.  Anyway, the movie was a lot better than I thought it would be and it surprised me that the "bullshit" parts were actually the best parts of the movie.  That says something, but I am not so sure that I can put that into words right now.  Maybe it has something to do with movie makers becoming too dependent upon CGI and computer technology and have forgotten how to make good movies on the basic level.

With respect to #2, I don't recall hearing a lot about this.  Actually, I found this on the White House page, so this didn't come from a "right-wing" site, but from the honcho in chief's own site.  It counts this as an "accomplishment".  If this is his idea of accomplishment, I think he should be sent out to pasture posthaste.  This is the dumbest damn thing I think I have ever seen, and I think I've seen some dumb shit already.

By the way, why the hell weren't the "right-wing" sites raising unGodly hell about this?  It all makes me wonder if all of this is just some kind of con job being done to the public again.  Like there's no real opposition, they are all in on this thing.  Very suspicious to me.

After those two items, nothing seems to strike me as being on the agenda yet.  I haven't checked the news.  If nothing comes up, I may explore addictions today.  I sort of went into that yesterday towards the end of the day.

Stay tuned.

Update:

Oh, boy.  Don't even know what day it is.  It is the sixth.  Damn.

Evening Summary, 9/5

I used to do these too, but once I went back to work in late January, I stopped.

Ok, I'm not working now.  I have a problem with my foot.  I'm going to go back to work on the 17th, hopefully the problem will not return.  Until that time, I will be here on a full-time basis.

Today started with a good idea, but seems to have fizzled out.

I have a theory that Western Civilization is drowning in its own bullshit.  We can't face the truth.  Nor speak it.  It's getting worse, not better.  What can turn it around?  Anything?

I proposed to bullshit clearing ideas, but, naturally nobody's interested.  Par for the course.

Anyway, I'll continue for awhile longer.  Until the money runs out.  If it comes to that.

Over and out, comrades.

Is Porn Poison for the Brain?

Does porn actually damage the brain?

Might sound far-fetched, but there is some very interesting research on this topic that might convince you that it does. This week, I plan to post each day on a different topic related to my new book, Sex & God at Yale. Chapter 2, entitled "The Great Porn Debate," details a rip-roaring Oxford-style porn debate starring porn performer Ron Jeremy, which was held in New Haven during my junior year.

I think it should be banned, even though I use it myself. It has probably done a lot of harm to men since WWII. Before then, it was probably nonexistent. This was probably a lot better country then, and it would be a lot better if we got rid of this.

I don't understand why people come here

Yes, I am against Islam in Western Civilization.  But that doesn't make me a "hater", as far as I'm concerned.  No, it's what these Islamic people teach in their own societies that make me against them.  They shouldn't be here because they are incompatible with our ways.

Yes, I am also against putting Israel's well-being at the top of the list for a country of over 300 million people.  I don't think that makes me anti-semitic.  But I'm liable to be seen that way.

I wrote something about hate in the early days of this blog.  Nothing has changed.  I hate bad thinking.  I won't apologize for that kind of hate.  But I don't hate anybody.  Nobody is going to pin that one on me and make it stick, unless they are bullshitting.  And I do hate that.

This blog isn't a hate site and it doesn't promote hate.  Except for bad ideas and bad thinking.

Let the chips fall where they may.

Speaking of Porn

Ace of Spades blog

There's a mountain of suck out there today, but every once in a while, you'll find a nugget of gold

Television can control public opinion more effectively than armies of secret police, because television is entirely voluntary. The American government forces our children to attend school, but nobody forces them to watch T.V. Americans of all ages *submit* to television. Television is the American ideal. Persuasion without coercion. Nobody makes us watch. Who could have predicted that a *free* people would voluntarily spend one fifth of their lives sitting in front of a *box* with pictures? Fifteen years sitting in prison is punishment. But 15 years sitting in front of a television set is entertainment. And the average American now spends more than one and a half years of his life just watching television commercials. Fifty minutes, every day of his life, watching commercials. Now, that's power.

People love television because television is bullshit.  They love their bullshit, don't they?

Will Bill Help Barack…Or Just Bill?

Dick Morris TV: Convention Alert!

Here's an example of why the truth is slippery.  Clinton must give a helpful speech for Obama, or Hillary is sunk in 2016.  It is as simple as that.  If he screws this up, he screws himself.  He won't.  Therefore, to hope for something else is just wishful thinking.

You can't win if you count on luck.  It doesn't always go your way.  Another one that this close--- millimeters-- from being called bullshit.

The Lending Lindy

Investment Outlook

Not sure if this is bullshit or not, so I don't know if I hate it or not.  I put it up because he writes about something that I've noticed for a long time now.  It's a long term trend towards zero-interest rate, and that ain't good, kids.

If the dancing has slowed down, then the reason is not just an overweight partner. It’s that the price of money (be it in the form of a real interest rate, a quality risk spread, or both) is too low. Our entire finance-based monetary system – led by banks but typified by insurance companies, investment management firms and hedge funds as well – is based on an acceptable level of carry and the expectation of earning it. When credit is priced such that carry is no longer as profitable at a customary amount of leverage/risk, then the system will stall, list, or perhaps even tip over.

Well, that part of the essay ain't bullshit.  But I don't know about the rest.  I am about this close--- two fingers a millimeter apart--- to calling bullshit on this article.  But I won't.

Morning Jay: The Importance of Bill Clinton

white voters

It won't work for me.

By the way, I don't much care about the DNC.  After all, I hate bullshit.

I'm pushing these foreign policy ideas though, even though they may help the Democrats.  This is their best chance for victory.  The economy won't do it.  On the other hand, if Romney showed some real imagination in his foreign policy, he may be able to win the youth vote.  Young people are worried about war, because they would have to fight it.  The best pitch to them is to assure them that a vote for Romney is not a vote for war.  A tough sell, but Romney better find a way to make it.

When it comes to no-win scenarios, I'm with Kirk

I'd like to share some of my thoughts on what my few hours of research turned up.  The US has several uninhabited islands in the Pacific (Palymra looks the best) and one in the Caribbean (Navassa Island looks the best).  Neither of these is worth a damn.  But there they are.  Neither of these are big enough to support a large population.  Instead, they would support seasteads around them.  That's the idea.  Crazy huh?  But I don't like to lose.

A co-worker had a nickname for me--- Captain Kirk.  I don't think he meant it as a complement.

I like to think in terms of problem solving

After saying that I hate bullshit, I will turn to what  I like--- I like problem-solving.

But the world doesn't work that way.  So, I'm not in tune with the way the real world works even though I like real as opposed to bullshit.  Quite the paradox, isn't it?

I've been thinking of a possible solution of certain conflicts that exist in the world, but since the world doesn't work that way, a violent ending is more likely.

Could a solution be found to the problem of Taiwan and Israel?  I know that these are tactical defeats.  I don't know if they are strategic defeats.  But I am on shaky ground.  I'm using words and concepts that I don't know very well.

Tactical defeat implies a difficult to accept, but not fatal defeat.  A strategic defeat could be fatal.  The difference between the two is one in which I'm not sure that I can pin down at the moment.

First, the difference between our current situation and Europe just prior to World War II.  It is often believed that Neville Chamberlain did the wrong thing in appeasing Hitler.  Buchanan wrote a book in which he said that he thought Chamberlain was right, and that Churchill was wrong.  Actually, I think Churchill was right, and that was because it would be impossible for Hitler to win against the Soviet Union, France, and England combined, along with having to defeat a well-defended stretch of territory.  All the military advantages lied with Chamberlain, but he gave it all away.  That's where Churchill was right.

But what would be right today?  Is Israel and Taiwan defensible?  Very difficult.  Are they strategic?  Hard for me to see it.  What about our sacred honor in keeping to these treaties, then?  If we abandon them, we will suffer greatly for it.  So, what could you do to make up for it in such a way that these people may accept it?

Iran offered that we should resettle the Jews in Europe.  But would there be any territory in Europe that they would be willing to give up and that Israel would accept for resettlement purposes?  Is this a negotiation that could succeed?  That's up to Israel and Europe.  But what about us?  Europe may not give a rat's ass about the USA, so they may let us get into a war that will be the end of us.  In that case, it may well be the end of them as well.  They may want to consider the Iranian proposition.

I don't know if anything comparable is possible for Taiwan.  Also, I don't know what the Chinese attitude toward that would be.  China is a bigger problem for us than the Middle East.  This question is even more important than the Israel question.  But a solution to that problem may give an incentive for the Chinese to be receptive to another solution to the Taiwan problem that would obviate the need for the use of force.  In that case, peace may be possible, but once again--- where do you get the territory and who will give it up?  This time, it will be the United States.  We may have to give up some territory to resettle the Taiwanese who do not want to join China.  Where would that be?  I haven't the slightest idea.

But these are all speculations.  The real world doesn't work that way.  Nobody will ever do anything like this, so war is the likely outcome.

Update:

This idea of solving the Taiwan and Israel problem is so speculative, that I'm going to put a belated speculation alert on this post.  I've been studying this idea for hours and it looks impossible.  That's too bad.

One possibility that is a real long shot, but is talked about from time to time is the idea of seasteading.  In order to make a seastead community big enough to house this many people would require hundreds of billions for Israel alone.  That's assuming the Jewish people would be even remotely interested in the idea.

I figured 250 billion would house 5 million people.  That, according to some estimates that I've seen.  This doesn't count the economic basis which much exist for such a community and so forth.  Whether or not such a thing could be conceived is well beyond my knowledge.  Once again, I don't have time for this.  Nobody is paying me to do this, so it is only for my "amusement".  Or yours, since this is probably the biggest damn fool thing ever thought of.

What the hell.

Perhaps a hasty judgment

Interestingly enough, I mentioned that I stopped watching the video halfway though, I mentioned in the previous post.  So, I thought I'd watch the rest. Actually, the action ended the way I thought it should have ended.  Perhaps the flaw in the movie is that this scene lasted too long.  I figured Neo should have flown away to escape the ever-escalating numbers of Mr. Smiths.

I think I may have missed the point, therefore.  The point is that virtual reality allows a false reality to be created at will, which means infinity, but a physical being like Neo is much more limited.  This is like truth.  There is infinity in untruth, but only one truth can be possible.  An infinite number of lies can be invented to hide the truth.  But the truth has to fight the infinite number of lies, so it has a distinct disadvantage.

I have many weaknesses.  Among these is rashness.  I rushed to judgment.  The video is not garbage, after all.  But there are flaws.

Update:

This also calls into question what I wrote before about Israel and Taiwan.  I am trying to learn to think like Sun Tsu.  Is this a good idea to fight for these countries?  Is this position tenable?  To fight or not to fight, that is the question.  It is not always a good idea to fight.  Sun Tsu teaches this.  To know when to fight is the key.  You have to have a sufficient reason.  If you are wrong and you lose, you can lose everything.

Update:

I guess I'm just going to have to watch the movie even though I don't have time.  I am going in with a prejudice against it, though.  I read this plot summary on Wikipedia in order to see if I can save time.

On the other hand, perhaps I shouldn't spend all my time watching movies.  There's not much time.  No time for this.  Okay, it's off.

A last thing about this movie--- it looks very imaginative.  I can give praise for that.  But it may push the envelope of bullshit a little too far.  That's it.

Morning Summary 9/5

Another one of these.  This may not become a habit again, I just need it in order to let people know that I'm not quitting my blogging.  Not yet, anyway.

That may seem portentous, it is only the truth.  I need a revenue source to continue blogging, so I don't know how long I can continue without this source.  An audience is required, but the audience isn't there.  A sponsor is needed, but there are none.  Money makes the world go round, and this blog needs money to continue and there isn't any.  Besides, I've all but given up on getting any.  My job funds that, but I'm not able to stay healthy enough to work at this kind of job.  It's getting tougher and tougher.

I've got plenty to say.  But I don't know how long I'll be able to say it here.  That's all.

Moving on, I have a new inspiration for some posts.  You see, my "tank", as Mark Twain would put it, runs dry on a regular basis.  It filled up overnight, and now I have a new idea I want to explore.  It has to do with reality and truth, which is something I've discussed several times before.  It fits my philosophy that the truth is slippery.  Exactly when you think you've got it, it slips away from you.  If you think you have it, you are probably wrong.  You have to keep looking for it, hoping to peel off the untruth like you peel an onion.

It also has something to do with Western Civilization, which everyone seems to believe is in a lot of trouble.  I say everyone, I don't know for sure that it's everyone.  Besides, there are many who feel "good riddance", because they don't support Western Civilization.  That's one of our problems in this society.  We don't appreciate what we've got, and take too much for granted.  Once it is gone, it may not ever come back.  Before we allow that, we should be damned sure that we know what we are doing.  That's where truth comes in.

The idea is about truth and what should be the attitude towards it.  I will flesh this out with some posts during the day.  I hope I can keep all of this together, because it is complicated.  Maybe too complicated, but that is the nature of things.

Stay tuned.

Sun Tsu

With the recent posts about the prospects of war in the Middle East, comes this video about the Art of War.

The video was taken down.



An interesting part was about the Battle of Gettysburg, when Lee decided to ignore one of the fundamental doctrines of war that says do not attack high ground, but seek another way. General Longstreet, a lieutenant of Lee's wanted to go around the high ground and march towards Washington, but Lee refused. This is considered to be Lee's greatest mistake. It may have cost the war. On the other hand, if he had done what Longstreet wanted, it may have won the war for him.  Thus does history turn on such events.

With respect to Israel and the Middle East, what would be the best way forward? To attack the nuclear sites or not? There's nothing comparable to a high ground, but there is an objective--- which is to remove a threat to Israel.   Israel's goal is to continue to exist.  What will Israel do?

Meanwhile, Israel sees a growing gap between themselves and Washington, so they have a very narrow range of options, lest they isolate themselves even further. But this may not be all that it appears to be. You can take things at face value, and this may be just a lot of smoke.  The words coming from potential adversaries leads me to believe that they may believe that they can intimidate Israel into passivity.  But none of this may be as it appears.  Israel does not bluff, that is not their history.  If their history is any guide, they will attack, they cannot afford to fail to do this.

Israel can succeed, but the blowback is what could be the bigger issue.  What will Iran do to retaliate, and what will the response be to that and so forth?  The prospect of that is what the Iranians and their allies have been using for a propaganda advantage, and it may be effective in thwarting an attack, but for how long?  It doesn't change the situation any, so it can only influence the timing of what must occur eventually.  This is going to be resolved one way or another.

Another thing to consider is the US election for president.  Israel may prefer Romney, and could angle for that result.  The key is whether an attack helps Romney or it helps Obama.  If things go well, it helps Obama now.  If it goes poorly, it is hard to say if it helps Romney or Obama.  It all depends on how Obama looks in how he responds to events.  If he looks ineffective, it hurts him.  If he looks wise and statesmanslike, it helps his prospects for re-election.  At the moment, it looks like Obama is a bit weak and is being taken advantage of by adversaries.  The adversarial element may want a weaker leader that they can take advantage of.

Obama's main weakness is that he is too political.  He only does things to help himself politically.  He will cater to the weaknesses of his own people and not ask them for their support in order to accomplish a difficult, but necessary mission.  It is also risky, because it can go badly and even spiral into a disastrous war. The risk of war works to his advantage, though.

From the political point of view, Obama can stoke fears of a rash Romney who may drag the US into yet another unpopular war.  The advantage is with Obama here, but he could lose that advantage, because the appearance of weakness cannot ever look good.  Romney could remind people that history has shown that even the mere appearance of weakness invites aggression.  It happened with the Empire of Japan at Pearl Harbor.  The Japanese were asked after the war why they attacked us and the reply was that they thought we wouldn't fight.  It is a fine line to walk between rashness and prudence.  A little too much on either side of the line has its risks.  One has to appear strong, but not rash.  Prudent, but not weak.  It is a very fine line.

In the end, one must define success by the attainment of objectives.  Israel's objective is to continue to exist.  Not so easy when you are surrounded by enemies.

Alas, Babylon

I remember reading that book back in high school. It is eerily similar to what is going on now. The book is about the aftermath of the nuclear war between the Soviet Union and the United States.

It is hard to believe that it has come down to this, but that may be where we are heading. The Russians are talking tough. We've got all of the Arab World against us it seems, as well as the Chinese and the Russians. The odds are not good for us. The main thing we have going for us is technology and that may not all be ours-- nor all of it secure against hacking.

Therefore, the outcome of this war, should it occur, does not appear favorable for us. But I am not a military expert.

The Russians appear to recognize their advantage and will push it to the hilt. I don't think Obama wants to fight, but he may be pushed into it.

All of this is insane. There is no reason for us to be in a war with Russia, for crying out loud. But the Russians resent their loss during the Cold War, and I think Putin wants revenge. The desire for revenge is a mortal sin. That mortal sin may result in a war that could kill billions of people. For what? Russia wants to deny Israel the right to defend itself. This is not acceptable.

It is hard to say why we are in this position. I don't think we have been unjust, but I do think we have been unwise. It may be too late now to cry over spilt milk. What's done is done. I think the Israelis will attack. I think the Russians will jump in. This will bring us in. There will be naval, air, and missile battles. I have no idea who will prevail. I think it is likely that Houston will be a prime target with a really big H Bomb or two. Maybe even three. There won't be many survivors around here. I don't expect to myself.

In the meantime, I think China will take advantage and attack Taiwan. There's little we can do about that. I don't think we are prepared to wage a war on this many fronts. A war with China may go nuclear fast, as with Russia. If all this happens, billions of people will die.

As I wrote earlier, it may be better to negotiate a strategic retreat. But human and nationalistic pride may forbid that. Pride goes before a fall. Hopefully, the unseemly pride is not ours, but I am not so sure of that. It may not matter who is at fault when everybody is dead, and the world is in ruins.

Pray for peace.



I think I should note that I thought this might have in 1973 with the Yom Kippur War. It may have come close back then. Just one misstep and Kaboom! That's all she wrote.

Dick Engel & Syd Ball

ORNL Molten Salt Reactor Engineer Interview shot for THORIUM REMIX

Published on Aug 31, 2012 by gordonmcdowell

On 2012-06-04 we toured Oak Ridge National Lab, and enjoyed dinner with some folks who researched Molten Salt Reactors under Alvin Weinberg. After dinner, Dick Engel and Syd Ball agreed to a short interview. This is that post-dinner interview.

Kirk Sorensen asked most of the questions, and probably a good thing he did as it allowed me to focus on collecting decent coverage.

Andy Kaufman does Elvis

This is really good. I remember it after all these years.

Morning Summary, 9/3/12

Been awhile since I did one of these. By the way, Happy Labor Day. I wish I could say that I was happy, but I'm not. Last night was a very bad night. I couldn't sleep because I am worried sick. Look at these numbers of US Military Personnel Overseas

By the way, I include a link to a map so to make it easier to see the point I am trying to make, which is only unknown to us stupid Americans who don't pay attention nor think about what our leaders are doing.  Also, I apologize because I should really know HTML well enough to make my own map instead of using this one:

Afghanistan 90,000.  Notice anything about the countries that surround this map?  All the countries in that region are not on the most friendly terms with the United States.  Actually, there are politicians who may assure us that this is not the case--- that they are all our friends.   BULLSHIT.  These troops are in a very precarious position if a war breaks out, which is very, very possible now.  This is why I have little confidence in our leadership.  If these troops have to fight their way out, then it is clear why morale is low and a lot of troops are killing themselves.  Our leadership is literally going to get these troops killed.  They know it.  We all should know it, but we are being sold a fantasy.

Token numbers of troops in eight Middle East countries (total of all --- I count 19331 of which 15000 are in Kuwait.  Kuwait and Afghanistan are going to feel the brunt of Iranian retaliation if a war breaks out there.  What exactly are we going to do if Iran marches about a half million troops into Afghanistan and Kuwait?  I'm not sure that they can do this, but they got a lot more people there than we do.  Whatever they can do, they can bring a lot more to the region than we can.  I don't like those odds.  I think this is a fool's game, and we are playing it.

Asia Pacific Japan and South Korea host about 65k troops.  Next door is China and Russia.  Big, first class military type adversaries.  We have been fighting Third World countries.  How would we do against the big bad Russian bear, and the big bad Chinese panda?  I am not particularly confident that this will end well either.  I understand that Australia is a big friend of ours, but what can we do when they are half a world away?  We are stretched very, very thin.  Another fool's game.

In Europe, Germany, Italy and the UK take up about 73660 troops.  With Germany on par economically or more than par with us, why they hell are we defending them?  Same for UK and Italy.  We are being bled white defending these nations when we should be defending ourselves.

Now, let me be clear about something. I understand to pull out and leave these countries to themselves will put us into even a more precarious position.  But we may be put there anyway if we lose a major confrontation, which from these numbers, is a very real threat.  What is better, to be defeated in a war, or to accept  a strategic defeat and do a strategic retreat?

I'd say this country, over the next several years, and in negotiations with our adversaries, should negotiate our withdrawal from these countries and bring our troops home.  This will mean isolationalism again.  Sure, and this will not be accepted by our leadership.  But how the hell do they really expect this situation to continue?
It can't.

Somebody might say this: You are a Republican and you say this?  Aren't you just as big a traitor as the Democrats?  There are those who think this is treason.  No.  It is reality and we are not facing reality in this country.  That is our biggest problem.  Forget everything else.  If we don't get reality on our side, there is no hope for this country.

Now you know why I didn't sleep last night.

George Washington warned against entangling alliances.  We are relatively weak again like we were as a young country.  The world has caught up.  We cannot continue to act as if we are on top of the world and we can still do this kind of stuff.  Reality time, people.

One more consideration.  The US Dollar is the world's reserve currency because of this worldwide straddling of the US Military like a Colossus across the world.  If we go, our reserve currency status also goes.  Which is why we may be going back on the gold standard.  That ought to tell you something.  We are going to be defending the whole world against the other half of the whole world.  We can't do it.

Draw your own conclusions.  I think our leadership is barking mad.

Update:

Looking at the Romney website on the issue of Iran, I'd say odds of a military confrontation is near certain.  Combined with what I've heard with respect to Israel, an attack is probably imminent.   But our leaders, what are they doing but talking big and carrying a little stick?  If you mean this, it means a draft and a couple million men under arms and a doubling the size of our navy and so forth.  They are not about to say anything like that.  Just more fantasy.  How are you going to pay for a doubling of the military budget?  Insane.

You could propose to the Russians that if they guarantee the security of the Israelies, we will withdraw from the region. I don't know, the Russians may take that deal, or they may want to rub our noses in it.

Are you people in Washington really, really sure about this?  I don't think they give a shit.  If they lose a war and can keep their power and rule over us with an iron fist, they won't give a shit.

Ted Nugent Warns: Feds Arresting Innocent Citizens Without Warrants

Scary, scary stuff. Do you realize how this can be abused? The video shows how it can be abused and is being abused, but pointing this out only brings a yawn, I bet.

What's the big deal if you are doing nothing wrong? Well, you don't have to be, you dummy. All you have to do is to run afoul of the party line in a one party state. After all, what are you going to do about it? Vote them out? Ha, ha.

If they become unhappy with you , you can be denounced by one of their spies, and BOOM! You've had it. Can't happen to you? Are you sure??? It's happened in other places in the world, we are not immune. Especially since so many of you insist upon being stupid.

Yeah, I realize I run the risk of not being persuasive because people object to being called stupid. Ok, you are not stupid. I'm stupid. Happy now? After all, I may be supremely stupid for believing that you can actually be enlightened. Silly me.

I got something else from Ann Barnhardt. She is so smart. She pointed out that people may be reading her only because they hate her so much. That also may be true in my case. I may be pissing off people so much that they are in a homicidal rage against me. So sorry. But I won't be afraid. That's because being afraid right now is the worse thing that I can be. I realize from this video how our system can be twisted into grave injustices because people simply will not do the right thing. I also realize that it may be too late and all I'm doing is pissing in the wind. But I am stupid because I am optimistic. Maybe I'm wrong though. It worries me.

More on Ann Barnhardt

This gal has so much good to say that I keep going back a reading her stuff again and again.  Here's something else she said:

Women are made with a healthy, innate desire to be provided for and protected. I know this because I am a woman, despite the pair of enormous brass balls I have to carry around. Those are merely an anomaly. Please ignore them, and no, you may not touch them. I just polished them last night. Back to the point, women want someone or someTHING to take care of them. For this reason, women tend to lean socialist, and are generally in favor of the expansion of government when the government promises to “provide” for them.

Is there anything that can be said about our current situation that is more true and to the point?  Every woman wants this, but the whole thing has been twisted into a type of exploitation.  The men exploit the women and the women exploit the men.  If the exploitation isn't too one-sided, the relationship can continue.  But the whole enterprise is one of exploitation.  By exploitation, it is what one can gain from the relationship.  That is opposed to what one can do for another in a relationship.

Now, this may be splitting hairs, but there's a difference.  Or I think there's one.  I pull out a quote about using and loving that goes like this:  "Love people, use things--- not use people and love things".  The thing that makes it all exploitative is that people really just love the things that marriage brings, not the other person.  That's why if a woman has faults, a man will leave her.  And vice-versa.  The toy is broken, and they want a better toy.  Not the wedding vow "to love for better or for worse, richer or poor, in sickness and in health till death do us part".  It is all about what can this other person do to gratify my wish for things to satisfy me, as opposed to the other person being enough to satisfy.  I see so much about in the world that makes me think that people are only using each other--- even in long-lasting relationships.

That's all pretty tough.  But there are other stories that are a lot worse.  They don't have happy endings.  I won't name names, but anybody in the family who may be reading this may know what I'm talking about.  I've already mentioned a little bit about my own experiences.  More than I care to relate, I must say.  It all comes down to what can you do for me--- not that they really want to be with you because you are so special bullshit.

The point is that people lie and that makes them vulnerable to being lied to--- because they love the lies so much.

Another thing that Ann mentions that I want to comment on briefly.

I would give up my vote in a HEARTBEAT if it meant that right-ordered marriage, family and sexuality was restored to our culture. I would rather that my little female namesakes grow up in a world where they did not have the right to vote, but were treated with dignity and respect, were addressed as “ma’am”, had doors held for them, and wherein men stood up when they entered the room. I would rather they be courted properly and then marry men who would never, ever leave them, and would consider it their sacred duty and honor to protect and provide for their wives and their children because he LOVED them. Oh, HELL yes. I’ll give up my vote in exchange for that any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Why wouldn’t you?

Frankly, I don't believe a word of this bullshit.  I have to call bullshit on Ann for this.  She is so angry at men that she would never marry any of us wretched creatures.  If she wanted a man like that, she could have one.  She could have as many as she wanted--- any of them.  But no, she'd never be happy with them because they would never meet her standards.  None ever could.  She is demanding too damned much.

I wouldn't marry her or any girl like her.  I would like to be happy, not miserable. She acts too much like a man.  OUCH!!!  That's right.  The truth hurts.  If she read this, which I doubt, she would probably accuse me of whatever moral weakness that strikes her at the moment.  The truth is, nobody is good enough for her.  She will never marry.   She is a flaming example of the very thing that she says she hates.

Dailymail: 'I have no social life'

Obama says he spurns parties so he can eat dinner with daughters and help with homework

One of the commenters said this:

To: DesertRhino
Actually, I see it more as him being a stuck-up, condescending, Ivy League, arrogant prick. That's why he withdraws. He thinks he's better than anyone around him. Plus he's afraid people will figure him out.

Too late.
50 posted on Sunday, September 02, 2012 12:24:09 PM by ponygirl (Be Breitbart.)

Well, I could comment on that thread, but I'd rather do it here.

I see Obama is a big daddy Pimp, and all his supporters as whores.  The whores don't care if he doesn't mingle with them socially, there are only interested in the take from their tricks.

Very harsh of me, yes, but very true because that is how they act.

Update:

Oh, yeah! I remember this from yesterday. This video goes perfectly with this post. The song is by Wham! George Michael, who is said to be gay. Well, he looks a bit feminine, and I think he may well be, but I don't know enough to say. Anywho, here goes:

Is the Commander-in-Chief also the Pastor-in-Chief?

You have got to give Ann Barnhardt some credit.  She gives you food for thought.  I am thinking about things I don't normally think about.  Like how the government has taken over the things that churches used to do-- such as taking care of the poor, the sick, and the elderly.  Now, the President wants to scare people into voting for him because they have no one else to turn to for help.  But wait, we used to do things differently in the old days.  We actually depended on ourselves.  Shriek! goes the Democrats.  Being left on your own!  The horrors!

You see, this is what the Democrats have trained us all into believing.  That they, and they alone are needed in times of trouble like this.  But really, isn't government the same thing as your own community?  So, why run to Washington, when you've got your own people in your own cities and towns that can help you?  I would bet that the vast majority of the people who vote for Obama would not think of this as a possibility.  Or there may be another reason.  They prefer the anonymity of the Federal government over the knowledge of one's own community.  You can hide out better from the Feds than from people who know you.  If you can help yourself, but won't, the Feds won't care.  But your neighbors would.

It really is a better system because it polices itself better.  For what polices a system where people have no incentive to do better when it is in their capacity to do better?  Incentive is the word.  Unless you have an incentive, you won't do something.  Nothing will motivate you to do something, unless it is out of sheer boredom.  It is better to have more motivation than that.  Unless, of course, we really don't want any better, or have lost hope that there can be any better.  Shame on the Democrats for allowing that to happen if it comes to pass.

There's something that I noticed lately.  Signs at the supermarket saying that they won't accept EBT cards.  You know, those cards that work like food stamps.  It appears that there's been too much abuse of the system, so now there's a tendency to crack down on it.  It's the old incentive again.  If people don't have the incentive, they won't behave better.  If they have to go through the checkout with the type of stuff that really doesn't belong on a food stamp, and face a cashier, they may be shamed into behaving better.  Now, if Obama wins, that incentive may go away too.  We will have lost yet another battle.

These are further reasons to oppose Obama.  He and the Democrats are causing people to give up.  Is that why you should vote for Obama?  So you can be a slob and nobody will say anything because it is useless and pointless because nothing can be done?  Or if someone tried to do something, the government will come down on the favor of the slobs and force everybody else who is being responsible to cater to them?

Now, if you don't have a job, and your pastor asks you what have you done to get a job, and you say--- "nothing"--- you say you'd rather not have that pastor ask you such embarrassing questions.  You'd rather have that Pastor-in-Chief in Washington who doesn't give a damn if you never work another day.  Because that strengthens him and his party, while it weakens your own will do it in order to help yourself.

Hopefully, this post is offered so that it may get some people to think a little more carefully about what they're doing this November.  I wish I could feel confident about that, though.  The Democrats may have done their jobs well.  They just may have corrupted enough people into liking this new way.

Polls Tightening: Dems Rooting For Xeno

Via Meadia

In case you haven't noticed, Mead has closed the comments feature on his blog.  Wonder why?  Here's a theory:  he is a Democrat.  He probably doesn't want to deal with the accusations of being a traitor on his blog.  So, he shut down the comments.

Anyway, what he means by Xeno, is derived from this quote:

The long term trend seems to be that Romney keeps nibbling at Obama’s lead, but like Achilles in Xeno’s paradox he doesn’t quite reach the goal.[ link added]

You can argue all you want about any paradox.  That is how truth can be slippery.  A mathematician can show why Xeno reaches the goal, the others will still find room for argument.  But what does your common sense say?  It says that he catches up and passes.  But the sophists will continue the argument anyway and will try to vex their opponents with their arguments.  And those observing the argument can't tell who won.

This is the way of the world.  How do you fool people?  With tricky argumentation.  But truth loses that way, sadly.

Dailymail UK: Obama says Romney is 'outdated' and Republicans have no new ideas

(as he cosies up to voters in the bar)

Mitt Romney and the Republican Party are offering outdated ideas that are ill-suited for the United States both today and in the future, President Barack Obama said in his latest attack on Saturday.

It makes sense for a Marxist to say this.  It is, after all, what they believe.  They believe that communism is scientific and inevitable--- therefore Obama is inevitable.  The next quote is a laugher, considering what they are doing in California:

'And when Gov. Romney had his chance to let you in on his secret, he did not offer a single new idea, just retreads of the same old policies that have been sticking it to the middle class for years.'[ emphasis added]

They've been sticking it to the middle class in California for years, except for the nomenklatura, of course.  California, the one party Democrat state, with the highest unemployment of any state.  Who's Obama talking to but the people on the receiving end of federal largesse, just as in California, which they can't pay for anymore in that state?  Those who can pay for it, he's has declared war against, just as in California.  See how well that works in future years in the rest of the country, as in California, if you can imagine.

Actually, Obama is talking about the leftist policies that have failed over the years.  It only seems new because it is the latest version.  But it has always failed before, and is failing again.

How Conventions Came To Be – Dick Morris TV

 History Video!

By the way, I see the lying scumbag Axelrod denying that there's been a convention bounce.

Back to topic: Morris explains how conventions became more democratic over time.

I thought I'd put this up here because it shows a historical trend towards more democracy.  This conflicts somewhat with the notion of democracy's faults--- which is what I've been writing about in posts today.  The trouble with democracy is that so many people simply do not have the capacity to keep up with everything like it needs to be kept up with in order to make the best possible decisions.  In short, too damned many people are uninformed, but that's what we have to work with.

This sounds elitist and maybe it is--- but it is the truth.  The truth is what matters on this blog--- not what I or another other people who may be coming here--- want to believe.  Truly, if you believe that you can be fully informed on all issues when- you don't pay attention until the very end of the campaign- you are kidding yourself.

Even I, who pay attention far more than average, miss a few things.  No, not a few things.  A LOT.  You simply cannot keep up with everything unless you are fully devoted to it. That is common sense.  So anybody who thinks otherwise, just get your heads out of your asses, please.

WUWT is the focus of a seminar at the University of Colorado

Watts Up With That?

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. sends word of this via email. I’m a bit amused, but not surprised, as we know WUWT has been pushing the traditional media envelope, and we often tackle subjects they can’t or won’t. I liked this statement about skeptical blogs:

They serve as extended peer communities as put forth by post-normal science, however, blog users themselves do not see post-normal science as a desirable goal.

She’s got that right. Just wait til she sees what is coming up next. – Anthony

In the comment section, I noticed a reference to Orwell.  How appropriate.  You know, I spent a lot of time last week watching videos, like 1984.  That kind of bizzaro world is where we're headed if we don't wake the hell up.

- That our contributions are now being analysed (“discourse analysis of seven posts including almost 1600 user comments”). Something I’d have no problem with ordinarily (I write bots to do exactly the same thing to trace how stories or information is spreading and where from). But it suddenly feels a little oppressive and Orwellian given the above assumed pathology.[emphasis added]

It isn't "pathological" to disagree, for heaven's sake.  What's up with these people?

Not a nice guy, but not a nice movie

But there's truth in it, which is why you watch it, isn't it?

Youth is wasted on the young

That's the theme today.  Some people just don't get it, so they keep doing stupid things that they'll regret when they get older and wiser.  Like this.  Update:  And this.  Comment:  People do stupid things when they are drunk.  Also, people don't believe bad things can happen to them.  That's what happens when you think this way.  Bad shit happens.  Update:  Oh, my God!  They erected a statue in honor of a dead fan who did something stupid like this.  When will the idiocy end?  If they do this in Houston, I will not go to another game again.  I will not support idiotic behavior like this or any organization that does.  I will disown the Texans.  I will not support them anymore.  This has to stop.

Why am I against this topless shit?  It is not because I don't like the female anatomy.  Of course I do.  But that should be relegated to the bedroom.  That is why this is wrong.  And rather foolish, I might add.  This harms standards of civilized conduct.  You don't want, or shouldn't want Western women to go around like African savages do you?  Whoa!  Bigotry! You damned right.  I damned sure won't apologize for telling it like it is!  This is stupid shit!  If we aren't better than Africa, then we'll start acting like them.  And that's where we are going thanks to this kind of stupid shit.

Generally, I like Glenn Reynold's blog.  But this is where he is f*****g up.  If I may use a bit of filthy language.  I don't always keep to standards myself.  So pardon moi.  Shame on you Glenn Reynolds.

Billy Joel - Only The Good Die Young

Uploaded by ShairedAccount41C on Dec 28, 2007

Should you take those words literally? My old man died young, but mama was more moral than he was. She outlived him by 35 years. Sure, women on the average live longer than men, but by that much? I won't take it literally.

But it works with the way people like to think. It's more fun to be immoral. So you would "rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints". Until the sinners run into trouble which causes pain, suffering, and death. But don't think about that cause it isn't fun.  Much more fun to live it up now.  You'll pay for it later.   The Grim Reaper always gets paid.

That's why I think people will do the right thing eventually when they see that the wrong thing isn't always what it is cracked up to be.  ( As with this song.)  The song sells and puts money in Billy Joel's pockets, but the money comes out of your pockets.  How smart is that?

GOP convention viewership down more than 40%. Mark Levin asks, why? What does it augur?

proteinwisdom via Instapundit

He gave several reasons why he thought the viewership was down.  I didn't watch either, but the point is where did I get my news of the convention?  I don't trust the media and the internet reporting shows a very good reason why not.  Now if the viewership counts internet users, then this might not be significant.  But does it?

I checked the comments, some of them.  Nobody was making this point in there, so here it is.

I DO NOT TRUST THE MEDIA TO REPORT ACCURATELY.  THEREFORE, I WILL NOT WATCH THEM.  PERIOD.

Ann Barnhardt against Women's suffrage

She thinks it was a big, big mistake to give women the right to vote. Thus, it disqualifies her from ever running for office.

I like Barnhardt. But this is a bit too much. She's right though, in this one aspect of her argument. It has provided the opportunity for the left to drive a wedge between the sexes and to use that in order to gain power. For that is what they have done and continue to do. As Barnhardt says, that is one of the things that is destroying Western Civilization.

Is there another possibility? Yes, but it is harder. It would be harder to do this than it would be in repealing the 19th Amendment. That is, to get people to have an uncompromising desire for truth from politicians. But this would also entail people to have an uncompromising desire for truth in their own lives. I think that would be the antidote, but that antidote is very hard to administer because people love untruth ( and even outright lies ) so much. Truth is very slippery, and one reason for this is that lies are so very seductive. Lies enable you to obtain that which you wouldn't be able to obtain otherwise. This is so very seductive. People can't resist it.

Another reason that I can put forth that the truth is slippery is my own attitude towards what Barnardt has said. I don't want to accept what she says even if what she says is the truth. I'd prefer to believe that you can persuade people of the truth in spite of the fact that people would rather believe a lie or what is false. So, no matter how well you may argue you point, no matter how well you present your arguments, you will not be persuasive because these people will not believe you. The truth is dead in them or asleep. All the Marxists need is a majority and that may be easier to obtain if people are divided on the basis of sex amongst other things. Divide and conquer.

Therefore, even though Barnhardt is probably right, I'd prefer to keep the 19th Amendment. Sure, that makes it so much easier to subvert our freedoms and may lead to the end of our freedoms, but I prefer it. God help us all.

Update:

Like I said before, I like Barnhardt. I really do. But I must disagree with her on this. In order to make my point more forceful, I will have to tell a story I'd prefer not to tell. But it must be told in order to show the point--- which is that Barnhardt does not truly respect men as much as this post would indicate.

I've read her stuff quite often. She admits that men are physically stronger, but she is adamant in her belief that men are cowards. Men are nothing more than dumb brutes, it would seem. Nothing can manipulate a man more than that --- to call him a coward. Because a man doesn't want to seen as a coward in the eyes of his woman. He knows that he's toast with his woman as soon as she begans to believe that--- so he must demonstrate his manhood in order to satisfy his woman. This gives a woman great power over a man. That is something that I will never permit a woman to have over me. That is why I think that I never married.

On the other hand, I won't go into details about my story. Only this-- that I failed to do a task on several occasions by the women I have known. This reduced my stature in their eyes and the relationships failed each time. This led to some very painful experiences in my life which made me doubt myself as a man-- but I see now that I was too hard on myself. I was correct for not letting them have that power. For if a woman truly honored you, she wouldn't be thinking what she thinks. She wouldn't try to manipulate you into doing things against your better judgment. Therefore, you become objectified, and the relationship becomes objectified. You are only a symbol of a man--- not the man for himself.

There are those who would sneer at me and say the women were correct. It is this kind of thinking that is leading us over the abyss. Not the so called "weakness", but the manipulation and the untruth.

Barnhardt doesn't have faith in people. I'd like to have some faith in people if only you can be persuasive enough. But I also understand that this is a very, very hard thing to do. If someone cannot be persuaded, you will fail. It is up to people to be open to be persuaded. That is much easier said than done. My own experience is the testimony to that. For what it is worth.