1965! Still in elementary school in San Antonio back then, but I remember the song well. There sure were a lot of good songs. Seemed like they all were. The music was just better.
Roger Miller had a lot of hits back then. People today would say "Roger Who?"
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, June 21, 2014
We Know The Whereabouts of Lost IRS Emails… | The Daily Sheeple
We Know The Whereabouts of Lost IRS Emails… | The Daily Sheeple
The NSA has them. Yeah, I figured as much. But I'm not worrying about it.
The NSA has them. Yeah, I figured as much. But I'm not worrying about it.
Recap of last weeks posts 6/15 to 6/21/14
The thought returns that I've had before, and that's the reason for a society's decline is that it just gets old. Any society is organic just like people are. As people get old, they sicken and then die off. New life takes its place.
If all societies are like that, then there's really nothing you can do about the nation's decline. It's all inevitable, just as death in the individual is inevitable. This is a considerable change in my outlook. I always figured that there was the possibility of renewal in this society. Maybe I wrong about that.
In any case, I came to the conclusion towards the end of the week that I won't worry about it. The world has always been on a knife edge of destruction. There's nothing new in that. No sense in worrying about it because there's nothing anyone can do about it.
For now on, I will concern myself with things that I can control.
Update:
Ooops! Forgot. The "Best of" category of posts got one new addition this week:
More thoughts on going off the grid ( with some useful links )
If all societies are like that, then there's really nothing you can do about the nation's decline. It's all inevitable, just as death in the individual is inevitable. This is a considerable change in my outlook. I always figured that there was the possibility of renewal in this society. Maybe I wrong about that.
In any case, I came to the conclusion towards the end of the week that I won't worry about it. The world has always been on a knife edge of destruction. There's nothing new in that. No sense in worrying about it because there's nothing anyone can do about it.
For now on, I will concern myself with things that I can control.
Update:
Ooops! Forgot. The "Best of" category of posts got one new addition this week:
More thoughts on going off the grid ( with some useful links )
Next Big Future: Spacex Dragon lander could land on Mars with a mis...
Next Big Future: Spacex Dragon lander could land on Mars with a mis...: One of Ames' long standing science interests has been to robotically drill deeply into Mars' subsurface environment (2 meters, or mo...
Discussion consists of using the Dragon capsule to deliver a digging mechanism that can mine water. If you got water, you are mostly in business for life support, and production of rocket propellant.
Discussion consists of using the Dragon capsule to deliver a digging mechanism that can mine water. If you got water, you are mostly in business for life support, and production of rocket propellant.
In 2010, an Ames scientist realized that the crew-carrying version of the SpaceX Dragon capsule would possess all the subsystems necessary to perform a soft landing on Earth, and raised the question of whether it could also soft land on Mars. If it could, it might be a candidate platform for a Discovery or Mars Scout class deep drilling mission, for example.( emp, added) --- Brian WangWater is necessary for life anywhere. This should be the primary emphasis. Coincides well with science and settlement goals.
Digging post holes
Prev Next
Next in the series with respect to going off-the-grid.
Turning attention to making some shelter that will offer plenty of shade from the sun. Either a conex or an RV has been under consideration. A conex is cheaper and bigger. You can also use the roof for a greenhouse. On the other hand, an RV of some type will be needed anyway. Why buy an extra structure?
On the ground or under? We need some protection from the elements. A trench give some protection, but is a lot of work.
Either way, if you dig a trench or not, there is going to be a need to dig some post holes so as to nail some 4 by 8 boards to them. In the trench, the boards will prevent the earth from falling in. ( hopefully). At surface level, it will be a garden variety type fence.
Equipment needed will be a post hole digger.
Then fence posts can be installed in the holes. Here's an idea to use foam as opposed to concrete. Those tube-type thingies that you pour the foam into, I've seen 'em before.
Update: ( 9/19/2014):
This is a Home Depot video that shows some various kinds of concrete. One that interests me is the kind where you pour the dry mix into the hole, then add the water and it sets. Easy as pie.
Update ( 9/23/14):
Couple of videos about digging fence post holes and then filling it with concrete. Uses a hand augur and not a powered one as above.
Update: ( 11/6/14)
This is a link to the spin off series about digging post holes for a canopy that I decided to build.
Next in the series with respect to going off-the-grid.
Turning attention to making some shelter that will offer plenty of shade from the sun. Either a conex or an RV has been under consideration. A conex is cheaper and bigger. You can also use the roof for a greenhouse. On the other hand, an RV of some type will be needed anyway. Why buy an extra structure?
On the ground or under? We need some protection from the elements. A trench give some protection, but is a lot of work.
Either way, if you dig a trench or not, there is going to be a need to dig some post holes so as to nail some 4 by 8 boards to them. In the trench, the boards will prevent the earth from falling in. ( hopefully). At surface level, it will be a garden variety type fence.
Equipment needed will be a post hole digger.
Then fence posts can be installed in the holes. Here's an idea to use foam as opposed to concrete. Those tube-type thingies that you pour the foam into, I've seen 'em before.
Update: ( 9/19/2014):
This is a Home Depot video that shows some various kinds of concrete. One that interests me is the kind where you pour the dry mix into the hole, then add the water and it sets. Easy as pie.
Update ( 9/23/14):
Couple of videos about digging fence post holes and then filling it with concrete. Uses a hand augur and not a powered one as above.
Update: ( 11/6/14)
This is a link to the spin off series about digging post holes for a canopy that I decided to build.
Review of the LIFESAVER® Jerrycan 10000 Water Filter System
Prev Next
The off-the-grid series continues with a neat solution to the water problem. But you have to find a water source. The good news is that the water source does not have to have good water. This device can fix that problem.
Can be purchased at Costco. Looks like 1000 days worth of water filtration can be had for 50 cents per day.
Update:
Gizmag review here.
The off-the-grid series continues with a neat solution to the water problem. But you have to find a water source. The good news is that the water source does not have to have good water. This device can fix that problem.
Can be purchased at Costco. Looks like 1000 days worth of water filtration can be had for 50 cents per day.
Update:
Gizmag review here.
Posting will be light today
I've got to do some stuff. One thing is to service my van. This is the day for that because there isn't enough time during the week.
Update:
Two new tires for the van. Prices have gone up for tires. Gomer Pyle: Well, surprise, surprise, surprise!
Who'd a thunk that prices would go up? Not lil 'ol me.
Update:
Two new tires for the van. Prices have gone up for tires. Gomer Pyle: Well, surprise, surprise, surprise!
Who'd a thunk that prices would go up? Not lil 'ol me.
Friday, June 20, 2014
What if the poop hits the air recirculation device?
You could have asked that question 50 years ago. The threat of nuclear war has existed at least that long.
Today's troubles are compounding that, which has never gone away. Today's troubles are within, or so it seems. That can change pretty fast, for nature abhors a vacuum. Some entity or entities will rush in and fill the gap that the US leaves behind. Then the troubles can no longer be denied. Until then, what?
You can just go on living like everything is normal until it isn't anymore. That doesn't mean to go into denial that there's problems. No, but you cannot let your life be determined or dominated by this fear. Live the best you can. That's all anybody can do, and has always been so. The end of the world has always seemed near.
"Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."
Upon a little reflection, this little ditty may seem too good to be true.
In that case, screw you then.
Today's troubles are compounding that, which has never gone away. Today's troubles are within, or so it seems. That can change pretty fast, for nature abhors a vacuum. Some entity or entities will rush in and fill the gap that the US leaves behind. Then the troubles can no longer be denied. Until then, what?
You can just go on living like everything is normal until it isn't anymore. That doesn't mean to go into denial that there's problems. No, but you cannot let your life be determined or dominated by this fear. Live the best you can. That's all anybody can do, and has always been so. The end of the world has always seemed near.
"Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."
Upon a little reflection, this little ditty may seem too good to be true.
In that case, screw you then.
Email controversy another example of "Gaslighting"
At the risk of overintellectualizing, the Dems denying of wrongdoing in this instance may yet be another example of what Bill Whittle describes in his video about "Gaslighting".
It's all a big misunderstanding, the Dems will say. Nothing wrong here. Are you all right? Maybe you are being a little paranoid? Gaslighting.
Nope. The perceptions aren't wrong. You have to do something about this even if the outcome isn't guaranteed to go in your favor. It's time to impeach Obama. You cannot let this go by.
It's all a big misunderstanding, the Dems will say. Nothing wrong here. Are you all right? Maybe you are being a little paranoid? Gaslighting.
Nope. The perceptions aren't wrong. You have to do something about this even if the outcome isn't guaranteed to go in your favor. It's time to impeach Obama. You cannot let this go by.
A short personal story to illustrate a point
This one might be hard to follow. It rolls up a lot of things into a conclusion in which you may not agree. One of the points is that the difference between success and failure is really not that much. With that, I begin the story.
One caveat here: I don't like to tell too much about this as I like to keep my own privacy. A lot of extra details will be left out. But the important ones will remain.
Many years ago, there was a bit of a flirtation between me and a receptionist at one of my stops on a route I was doing at the time. For the longest time, she seemed to be hinting that I should do something, but what that something was wasn't clear to me. It turns out that she wanted me to call where she worked on weekends. And I was more than willing to do that, but... I didn't get it. Why? Why not talk right then and there?
There was a reason why, but I didn't get it. That's the point. Anyway, the second part of this is that I have this tendency to transpose in my reading, writing and speaking. Maybe it is a slight form of dyslexia. But one weekend, I tried this as I seemed to have gotten the hint again. So I did call, or I thought I did. But there was no answer. So, I figured she was just flirting and wasn't serious about anything and blew the whole thing off. Besides, I figured I'd get another chance some other time. I GOT NO MORE CHANCES.
I found out much later that she was avoiding a problem by having me do this and that was the reason for calling her there at that time. She was unwilling to be plain about it for that reason as well, but once again, one of my tendencies made it impossible for me to see this. That's another story which I won't be relating here. Anyway, her behavior seemed inexplicable and frankly a bit bizarre. But I was wrong about that.
It was a rather sad story as it ended, but a serious relationship came so close. Or I believe that it did. I believe it did because there were a few things I checked out that seemed to confirm it. The moral? The difference between success and failure could be as simple as typing in a wrong number and then not double checking to see if it was correct. Very simple, but the failure to do this could lead to some very unpleasant outcomes.
It doesn't have to be really complex. It could be really, really simple. Think of that when you are thinking about the fall of Western Civilization. It could take something really simple to turn it all around. Or it may not happen and the crash will occur.
For what it's worth.
Update:
I've connected a personal story to the goings on with respect to the civilization at large. Okay, if you think that is a big stretch, keep in mind one thing: that we don't need perfect people to run this country. In general, you don't need to be perfect for anything. We only need people to do their duty. In my own case, I should have been more careful. That's simple. In the end, doing your duty is a simple thing. The Constitution doesn't assume people are perfect, but the opposite. Otherwise, why do you need checks and balances? To restore confidence, they only need to do is their duty, which is what they swore an oath to do.
One caveat here: I don't like to tell too much about this as I like to keep my own privacy. A lot of extra details will be left out. But the important ones will remain.
Many years ago, there was a bit of a flirtation between me and a receptionist at one of my stops on a route I was doing at the time. For the longest time, she seemed to be hinting that I should do something, but what that something was wasn't clear to me. It turns out that she wanted me to call where she worked on weekends. And I was more than willing to do that, but... I didn't get it. Why? Why not talk right then and there?
There was a reason why, but I didn't get it. That's the point. Anyway, the second part of this is that I have this tendency to transpose in my reading, writing and speaking. Maybe it is a slight form of dyslexia. But one weekend, I tried this as I seemed to have gotten the hint again. So I did call, or I thought I did. But there was no answer. So, I figured she was just flirting and wasn't serious about anything and blew the whole thing off. Besides, I figured I'd get another chance some other time. I GOT NO MORE CHANCES.
I found out much later that she was avoiding a problem by having me do this and that was the reason for calling her there at that time. She was unwilling to be plain about it for that reason as well, but once again, one of my tendencies made it impossible for me to see this. That's another story which I won't be relating here. Anyway, her behavior seemed inexplicable and frankly a bit bizarre. But I was wrong about that.
It was a rather sad story as it ended, but a serious relationship came so close. Or I believe that it did. I believe it did because there were a few things I checked out that seemed to confirm it. The moral? The difference between success and failure could be as simple as typing in a wrong number and then not double checking to see if it was correct. Very simple, but the failure to do this could lead to some very unpleasant outcomes.
It doesn't have to be really complex. It could be really, really simple. Think of that when you are thinking about the fall of Western Civilization. It could take something really simple to turn it all around. Or it may not happen and the crash will occur.
For what it's worth.
Update:
I've connected a personal story to the goings on with respect to the civilization at large. Okay, if you think that is a big stretch, keep in mind one thing: that we don't need perfect people to run this country. In general, you don't need to be perfect for anything. We only need people to do their duty. In my own case, I should have been more careful. That's simple. In the end, doing your duty is a simple thing. The Constitution doesn't assume people are perfect, but the opposite. Otherwise, why do you need checks and balances? To restore confidence, they only need to do is their duty, which is what they swore an oath to do.
Enterprise Email 101: Understanding The IRS Email Loss
We should consider the possibility that the emails really are lost, so says this article on Ace. But the loss was not an innocent mistake. It could have been planned so as to cover up the tracks of rogue employees:
Does the IRS run its tax-collection efforts in this slipshod of a fashion? If they did, they'd be Keystone Cops. But I don't think they do because they have to be effective in their primary jobs, which is to collect taxes. If they were this incompetent in their primary function, no taxes would ever be collected.
The IRS is not feared for nothing. Their priorities aren't in complying with the law, but gathering up tax money. We should ask why their priorities are such and then act upon THAT.
It is plausible that this was an innocent coincidence. But it is only plausible if the IRS is managing its IT systems so badly that it is very easy to lose critical records -- or for abusive employees to destroy the evidence of their misbehavior.--- Megan McArdlePutting it another way: it was premeditated. They intended to do this a long time ago and accidentally on purpose destroyed the evidence of their misdeeds. Sounds plausible to me. Could have been a strategy planned by the Obama administration that could help them win reelection.
Does the IRS run its tax-collection efforts in this slipshod of a fashion? If they did, they'd be Keystone Cops. But I don't think they do because they have to be effective in their primary jobs, which is to collect taxes. If they were this incompetent in their primary function, no taxes would ever be collected.
The IRS is not feared for nothing. Their priorities aren't in complying with the law, but gathering up tax money. We should ask why their priorities are such and then act upon THAT.
citizen5408: Dinesh D'Souza's "America"
citizen5408: Dinesh D'Souza's "America": An audience of about 300 people attended a screening of the new movie, America , Thursday night at the AMC theaters in Maryland just north o...
Question:
Does any of this really do any good? One of the hallmarks of a dying civilization is the inability to do anything. People just talk and intellectualize. There's a need for action--- but what?
Amazingly, it probably wouldn't take much. Even bad politicians won't kill this country. The thing that will is the unwillingness to face basic problems. Like I've been saying all along... solve the energy problem and conquer space and a whole new world can emerge. We could be a lot closer to that than anyone realizes, yet we may also be on verge of destroying it as well.
Question:
Does any of this really do any good? One of the hallmarks of a dying civilization is the inability to do anything. People just talk and intellectualize. There's a need for action--- but what?
Amazingly, it probably wouldn't take much. Even bad politicians won't kill this country. The thing that will is the unwillingness to face basic problems. Like I've been saying all along... solve the energy problem and conquer space and a whole new world can emerge. We could be a lot closer to that than anyone realizes, yet we may also be on verge of destroying it as well.
Thursday, June 19, 2014
As long as I'm posting about "As Good As It Gets"
Here's another scene that develops Carol's character rather effectively. Carol seems to me to be a perfectionist. She is very envious of a doctor's wife. She'd really love to have that for herself and is sobbing up a storm because she can't get it. She gets explosively angry when her mother tries to talk to her about it.
All her Mom wants is to go out and celebrate a lucky break that her daughter just can't seem to appreciate. Fortunately for Carol, she says okay.
The thing here that I want to comment upon is that this is Hollywood. It has a happy ending. Life doesn't have happy endings, sadly...
Carol's really good fortune was to have a down-to-Earth mother who could step in and help her when she really needed it. The real world doesn't offer such breaks generally speaking. If you are going to accomplish anything, you may have to do it on your own. That may prove to be impossible. My own point of view, for what it's worth.
All her Mom wants is to go out and celebrate a lucky break that her daughter just can't seem to appreciate. Fortunately for Carol, she says okay.
The thing here that I want to comment upon is that this is Hollywood. It has a happy ending. Life doesn't have happy endings, sadly...
Carol's really good fortune was to have a down-to-Earth mother who could step in and help her when she really needed it. The real world doesn't offer such breaks generally speaking. If you are going to accomplish anything, you may have to do it on your own. That may prove to be impossible. My own point of view, for what it's worth.
This scene could not make it into a movie today
The feminists would veto it. It is very disparaging of women. A little more after the video clip.
Now, I looked for the scene I wanted, but this wasn't the one. No, the scene I wanted goes with what I wrote earlier about perfection being the enemy of the good.
That scene was toward the end when Melvin ( Jack Nicholson ) goes to see Carol ( Helen Hunt ) and tell her that he loves her. Except that he really can't. Carol's mother is listening in to the conversation and interrupts Carol as she laments this and exclaims that she can't have a "normal boyfriend". Carol's mom says, there's no such thing.
That struck me as the kind of down to earth sensibility that you just don't see these days. She was saying in a scene what I am trying to get across in prose. Which works better? Who the f**k knows? Something has to cut through the noise.
We can't have perfection on this earth. It does not exist. But everybody insists upon it and scream and moan that they can't have it.
Now, I looked for the scene I wanted, but this wasn't the one. No, the scene I wanted goes with what I wrote earlier about perfection being the enemy of the good.
That scene was toward the end when Melvin ( Jack Nicholson ) goes to see Carol ( Helen Hunt ) and tell her that he loves her. Except that he really can't. Carol's mother is listening in to the conversation and interrupts Carol as she laments this and exclaims that she can't have a "normal boyfriend". Carol's mom says, there's no such thing.
That struck me as the kind of down to earth sensibility that you just don't see these days. She was saying in a scene what I am trying to get across in prose. Which works better? Who the f**k knows? Something has to cut through the noise.
We can't have perfection on this earth. It does not exist. But everybody insists upon it and scream and moan that they can't have it.
Newt Gingrich : 2014-06-18 : The IRS Scandal Just Got Much Worse
Free Republic
What we are up against is this willing blindness that Gingrich refers to right here:
What we are up against is this willing blindness that Gingrich refers to right here:
That the news media falls for it boggles the mind. As Peggy Noonan points out in a recent column, it’s hard to find a reporter who believes there is an IRS scandal at all.--- Newt GingrichLet's look at the facts: Obama fires Lerner. Why, if there's nothing wrong? Her emails disappear, how can that be? Aren't these people even a little bit curious about how the emails of this woman could disappear when she was fired and took the Fifth? Not even a little suspicion there?
Congressman: House would vote to impeach
wnd
Actually, if the House really would vote to impeach, then they should hold the vote and move forward.
As for the Democrats, we all know that they will block it. That's not a good enough reason to me anymore. Perhaps it should have never have been. For that's their duty. If someone has violated the Constitution, it is their duty to impeach. How else will there be accountability?
The comments come from Rep. Lou Barletta, R-Pa., in an interview with radio host Gary Sutton.
Actually, if the House really would vote to impeach, then they should hold the vote and move forward.
As for the Democrats, we all know that they will block it. That's not a good enough reason to me anymore. Perhaps it should have never have been. For that's their duty. If someone has violated the Constitution, it is their duty to impeach. How else will there be accountability?
Perfection as enemy of the good
Perhaps there are those of you out there, who aren't bots, who may have heard of this phrase. The best example of this in my experience is the Reagan presidency. I never voted for Reagan. But I consider him the best President in my lifetime, by far.
Why didn't I vote for him? Partly because I believed he wasn't very intelligent. This attitude came from the fact that at the time, I was in the university working on my degree. As a result, I had something of a liberal influence upon me. Liberals like Tip O'Neill, the Speaker at the time, called Reagan an "amiable dunce". There was no respect for the man's intelligence. Yet, this was an incorrect assessment of the man's intelligence. His intelligence was such that he was able to cobble together a winning strategy for the Cold War. Nobody before or since has been able to match that, or even come close.
Reagan seemed to tap into the common folk's feelings. People liked the man. But this didn't matter that much to me. Even more, I am suspicious of such things. Heck, people seemed to like Obama. They may still like him personally. But I am a bit suspicious of a man who can move the common folk. Maybe you can call this a bit of elitism in me, I don't know. It didn't turn out too badly for Reagan, but it is turning out rather badly for Obama.
Neither of these two reasons were enough alone to make me not vote for him. The thing that did it was his program for massive tax cuts and massive military spending. I knew that couldn't work, and as the course of events showed, it didn't. It didn't work in the sense that the budget couldn't be balanced with that type of program. Yet, my being right about this doesn't diminish my respect for what he accomplished. For, if it weren't for him, who knows what shape we'd be in right now.
The lesson I learned from that was that even though Reagan wasn't perfect, he was a good President. We don't need perfection. We just need someone who will be good. It will be a big challenge to find such a person, because it may not be obvious at the time. It wasn't with Reagan. Reagan was behind in the polls, according to what I've heard about the election. Before the debate, people may have had some doubts. But the debate ended those doubts and he went on to victory. I think the doubts were largely manufactured by the media, which was a lot worse than it is now.
People shouldn't dwell too much on the negatives. There are some good things out there. While there is plenty of bad, there is still the opportunity to turn things around. Reagan was able to do it. It is better to be hopeful than in despair. Everybody needs to keep their chin up and work for good outcomes.
Why didn't I vote for him? Partly because I believed he wasn't very intelligent. This attitude came from the fact that at the time, I was in the university working on my degree. As a result, I had something of a liberal influence upon me. Liberals like Tip O'Neill, the Speaker at the time, called Reagan an "amiable dunce". There was no respect for the man's intelligence. Yet, this was an incorrect assessment of the man's intelligence. His intelligence was such that he was able to cobble together a winning strategy for the Cold War. Nobody before or since has been able to match that, or even come close.
Reagan seemed to tap into the common folk's feelings. People liked the man. But this didn't matter that much to me. Even more, I am suspicious of such things. Heck, people seemed to like Obama. They may still like him personally. But I am a bit suspicious of a man who can move the common folk. Maybe you can call this a bit of elitism in me, I don't know. It didn't turn out too badly for Reagan, but it is turning out rather badly for Obama.
Neither of these two reasons were enough alone to make me not vote for him. The thing that did it was his program for massive tax cuts and massive military spending. I knew that couldn't work, and as the course of events showed, it didn't. It didn't work in the sense that the budget couldn't be balanced with that type of program. Yet, my being right about this doesn't diminish my respect for what he accomplished. For, if it weren't for him, who knows what shape we'd be in right now.
The lesson I learned from that was that even though Reagan wasn't perfect, he was a good President. We don't need perfection. We just need someone who will be good. It will be a big challenge to find such a person, because it may not be obvious at the time. It wasn't with Reagan. Reagan was behind in the polls, according to what I've heard about the election. Before the debate, people may have had some doubts. But the debate ended those doubts and he went on to victory. I think the doubts were largely manufactured by the media, which was a lot worse than it is now.
People shouldn't dwell too much on the negatives. There are some good things out there. While there is plenty of bad, there is still the opportunity to turn things around. Reagan was able to do it. It is better to be hopeful than in despair. Everybody needs to keep their chin up and work for good outcomes.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Pure Genius: How Dean Kamen's Invention Could Bring Clean Water To Millions | Popular Science
Pure Genius: How Dean Kamen's Invention Could Bring Clean Water To Millions | Popular Science
comment:
After reading the explanation for how it works, I still don't get it. When I have time, I'll read it again.
comment:
After reading the explanation for how it works, I still don't get it. When I have time, I'll read it again.
Weenies and patriots
Listening to Rush Limbaugh I gotta feeling that he is a problem. Its not like Democrats, not that kind of problem. No the problem with Limbaugh, is that he's a weenie. In fact all GOP ers are weenies. Democrats have no respect for Republicans because they are so ineffectual. This includes Limbaugh himself. I'm sorry to inform you of this, but you have to face the facts. The facts are that Limbaugh thinks we lost the country, but the only thing he can do about it is to sell books to kids. If we have a real crisis on our hands, how in the hell does this help us? Only a weenie would think it would.
Update:
This little snippet above was dictated on my "smart phone". Not much there as you can see. If the thing worked better, I'd have pointed out that the thing to be talking about is impeachment, not property rights. Impeachment, impeachment, impeachment. Every day until election day. Put some pressure on those guys in DC to do something. Even if they don't want to, make them do it anyway. But we'll get amnesty instead.
Barnhardt doesn't think it matters anymore and perhaps she's right. I think there ought to at least be a vote on impeachment. Also, that there be no dilution of the voters in the country at large so that we have at least a semblance of an honest vote. We ought to know if the public at large actually goes for Obama's schtick. I think not. I think it is all being forced upon us without our consent. If anybody in office would just say no to this usurpation, we could get back on track.
Where she may be right is that there aren't any GOP'ers that are willing to go on record as being in favor of impeachment. They may say so in private, but they'll never go public with it. The opposition to Obama is all a dog and pony show.
The problem with Limbaugh is that he loves his position more than he loves his country. He pretends to love the country and people believe him to be a great patriot. I think he loves his money more than he loves anything else. People like Limbaugh may be helpful if they were really sincere about what they are saying, and were willing to back it up with meaningful action. Instead, he sells kiddie books and talks about property rights.
People believe in him, though. That's the problem. Listening to Limbaugh may be a huge waste of time. In normal times, okay. But these aren't normal times.
Update a little while later:
Look, it may seem that I'm really hard on Limbaugh. But for him to do something significant would not cost him much, but it could mean a whole lot. I'm thinking of Focus Fusion. They need a couple hundred grand, and not one rich guy came forward with money to help this guy who maybe will change the world. Yes, it is a shot in the dark, but it is like winning the lotto for mankind. It would be HUGE. Why not roll the dice on a couple hundred grand if the payoff is so large?
What great news it would be for a troubled world.
Somebody might say: You gotta be kidding! This is left wing stuff! Why should I help those guys?!
A lot of "left-wing" people are doing more sensible things than we are right now. By "we", I mean people who claim to be conservative. I'm think of Jules Durvaes, who is feeding his family on 1/10th of an acre of land. That's a big deal. If enough people did this, it could make a big difference in this country. But no. We have to depend on big agriculture to feed us.
Update:
This little snippet above was dictated on my "smart phone". Not much there as you can see. If the thing worked better, I'd have pointed out that the thing to be talking about is impeachment, not property rights. Impeachment, impeachment, impeachment. Every day until election day. Put some pressure on those guys in DC to do something. Even if they don't want to, make them do it anyway. But we'll get amnesty instead.
Barnhardt doesn't think it matters anymore and perhaps she's right. I think there ought to at least be a vote on impeachment. Also, that there be no dilution of the voters in the country at large so that we have at least a semblance of an honest vote. We ought to know if the public at large actually goes for Obama's schtick. I think not. I think it is all being forced upon us without our consent. If anybody in office would just say no to this usurpation, we could get back on track.
Where she may be right is that there aren't any GOP'ers that are willing to go on record as being in favor of impeachment. They may say so in private, but they'll never go public with it. The opposition to Obama is all a dog and pony show.
The problem with Limbaugh is that he loves his position more than he loves his country. He pretends to love the country and people believe him to be a great patriot. I think he loves his money more than he loves anything else. People like Limbaugh may be helpful if they were really sincere about what they are saying, and were willing to back it up with meaningful action. Instead, he sells kiddie books and talks about property rights.
People believe in him, though. That's the problem. Listening to Limbaugh may be a huge waste of time. In normal times, okay. But these aren't normal times.
Update a little while later:
Look, it may seem that I'm really hard on Limbaugh. But for him to do something significant would not cost him much, but it could mean a whole lot. I'm thinking of Focus Fusion. They need a couple hundred grand, and not one rich guy came forward with money to help this guy who maybe will change the world. Yes, it is a shot in the dark, but it is like winning the lotto for mankind. It would be HUGE. Why not roll the dice on a couple hundred grand if the payoff is so large?
What great news it would be for a troubled world.
Somebody might say: You gotta be kidding! This is left wing stuff! Why should I help those guys?!
A lot of "left-wing" people are doing more sensible things than we are right now. By "we", I mean people who claim to be conservative. I'm think of Jules Durvaes, who is feeding his family on 1/10th of an acre of land. That's a big deal. If enough people did this, it could make a big difference in this country. But no. We have to depend on big agriculture to feed us.
Limbaugh's Pearls of Wisdom
The best stuff comes at the last where Rush says:
Precisely! The Ivy League types thumb their noses at common sense. I know I saw that somewhere. For them, to be accused of lacking common sense is no insult. It may even be a compliment. Nevertheless, if you have no common sense, you can't feed your kids. There you have it in a nutshell, people. Or bots, if that's the only ones coming here. (It may take some common sense to read this blog.) Nobody needs that anymore, but people still have to eat.
"Even with an Ivy League education, Michelle Obama didn't know how to feed her kids properly, which proves that degrees from Harvard and Princeton contain absolutely zero common sense."
Precisely! The Ivy League types thumb their noses at common sense. I know I saw that somewhere. For them, to be accused of lacking common sense is no insult. It may even be a compliment. Nevertheless, if you have no common sense, you can't feed your kids. There you have it in a nutshell, people. Or bots, if that's the only ones coming here. (It may take some common sense to read this blog.) Nobody needs that anymore, but people still have to eat.
Neil Diamond - Song Song Blue ( repost )
NOTE:
The original post had the video taken down by Youtube. That gives me an excuse to repost it here so that anyone interested can listen into the song.
It's a great little "pick me up" kind of song. Goodness knows, I need it, and maybe the whole world may need it too.
The original post follows with the mentioned change ( lyrics added at bottom of post ):
This was a hit song when I was still in school. For some reason, I associate the song with the time I took a Driver's Ed course.
It kinda sounded old fogeyish even back then. Even more so today, I imagine. But I'm an old fogey now, so it doesn't matter. I like it anyway.
Song sung blue, everybody knows one
Song sung blue, every garden grows one
Me and you are subject to
The blues now and then
But when you take the blues
And make a song
You sing 'em out again
You sing 'em out again
Song sung blue, weeping like a willow
Song sung blue, sleeping on my pillow
Funny thing, But you can sing
it with a cry in your voice
And before you know it get to feeling good
You simply got no choice
Me and you are subject to
The blues now and then
But when you take the blues
And make a song
You sing 'em out again
Song sung blue, weeping like a willow
Song sung blue, sleeping on my pillow
Funny thing, But you can sing
it with a cry in your voice
And before you know it start to feeling good
You simply got no choice
Song sung blue Song sung blue
Funny thing, But you can sing it with a cry in your voice
The original post had the video taken down by Youtube. That gives me an excuse to repost it here so that anyone interested can listen into the song.
It's a great little "pick me up" kind of song. Goodness knows, I need it, and maybe the whole world may need it too.
The original post follows with the mentioned change ( lyrics added at bottom of post ):
This was a hit song when I was still in school. For some reason, I associate the song with the time I took a Driver's Ed course.
It kinda sounded old fogeyish even back then. Even more so today, I imagine. But I'm an old fogey now, so it doesn't matter. I like it anyway.
Song sung blue, everybody knows one
Song sung blue, every garden grows one
Me and you are subject to
The blues now and then
But when you take the blues
And make a song
You sing 'em out again
You sing 'em out again
Song sung blue, weeping like a willow
Song sung blue, sleeping on my pillow
Funny thing, But you can sing
it with a cry in your voice
And before you know it get to feeling good
You simply got no choice
Me and you are subject to
The blues now and then
But when you take the blues
And make a song
You sing 'em out again
Song sung blue, weeping like a willow
Song sung blue, sleeping on my pillow
Funny thing, But you can sing
it with a cry in your voice
And before you know it start to feeling good
You simply got no choice
Song sung blue Song sung blue
Funny thing, But you can sing it with a cry in your voice
The "lost" emails
There are conflicting stories, of course. One story had it that you cannot "lose" an email. It is on a server somewhere. Then you hear that the servers were cleared from time to time. So, which is true?
This morning, I read that there is a law requiring that all emails have backup hard copies. Now the Dems are saying that the sequester prevented them from doing that.
You can be suspicious, but you still have to produce the proof. Unfortunately, I don't think they'll be able to do this. The Democrats may have a plausible excuse for all of this. But Ace doesn't think so.
It's being compared to the 18 1/2 minute gap in the Watergate tapes during the Nixon years. Without any of those other tapes, Nixon gets away with that. This could be history repeating itself.
The other alternative is to go all out political. That's what they did. That's what the GOP should do. Doing nothing but wringing your hands is just not good enough.
There's a report that Obama is daring the GOP to impeach him. On that subject, I was against impeachment. Now, I am for it on the grounds of principle. Even though it won't work, the Democrats will rally around Obama and so forth. Obama is doing this deliberately. He may even want an open break between the parties and the divisions in the country. That's so he can exploit it for himself. Everything that he does has a political angle to it.
If you are going to beat Obama, you have to beat him politically. If your impeachment is about preserving the Constitution, then how does Obama win by violating it? How does the politics of that favor him?
This morning, I read that there is a law requiring that all emails have backup hard copies. Now the Dems are saying that the sequester prevented them from doing that.
You can be suspicious, but you still have to produce the proof. Unfortunately, I don't think they'll be able to do this. The Democrats may have a plausible excuse for all of this. But Ace doesn't think so.
It's being compared to the 18 1/2 minute gap in the Watergate tapes during the Nixon years. Without any of those other tapes, Nixon gets away with that. This could be history repeating itself.
The other alternative is to go all out political. That's what they did. That's what the GOP should do. Doing nothing but wringing your hands is just not good enough.
There's a report that Obama is daring the GOP to impeach him. On that subject, I was against impeachment. Now, I am for it on the grounds of principle. Even though it won't work, the Democrats will rally around Obama and so forth. Obama is doing this deliberately. He may even want an open break between the parties and the divisions in the country. That's so he can exploit it for himself. Everything that he does has a political angle to it.
If you are going to beat Obama, you have to beat him politically. If your impeachment is about preserving the Constitution, then how does Obama win by violating it? How does the politics of that favor him?
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Ideology really can make you stupid
This argument is just plain stupid.
If computers get smart as people, then why do we need people? Duh.
The only way computers DON'T take away the jobs is if they don't become as smart as people. That's the argument that may make some sense. The argument used is all based upon ideology, which is why it is stupid.
Update a little while later:
Look, I'm nearly 60 years old. Fifty years ago, it really wasn't that different from today. But, if you go back 100 years, things were a lot different. That means most of the changes that occurred were in the early part of the 20th century. For the last 50 years, with the exception of computers, nothing much has changed.
Why is it only computers that are making all the advances? In order to remove people from the equation. I can think of no other reason.
If computers get smart as people, then why do we need people? Duh.
The only way computers DON'T take away the jobs is if they don't become as smart as people. That's the argument that may make some sense. The argument used is all based upon ideology, which is why it is stupid.
Update a little while later:
Look, I'm nearly 60 years old. Fifty years ago, it really wasn't that different from today. But, if you go back 100 years, things were a lot different. That means most of the changes that occurred were in the early part of the 20th century. For the last 50 years, with the exception of computers, nothing much has changed.
Why is it only computers that are making all the advances? In order to remove people from the equation. I can think of no other reason.
Home again 6/17/14
These type of posts reflect my relief at getting home. That is more true today than usual, for it was an unusual day. Lately, most of the business has been occurring in the morning. Today was no exception. There was a long layover period after about 2 PM, and then something came in at about 3:30 ish. Little did I know at the time that the thing would take over 2 hours to do, including the time to get home.
It wasn't complicated, but it did go into a high traffic area at the wrong time of the day. On the way, there could have been a road rage incident. In my younger days, I may have partaken in some salty language with an individual that cut me off. Maybe that is a good sign, as things could have been worse. Yet, that wasn't the only thing.
On the way back to drop off ( a credit card that I picked up for a purchase of some items that would go back to the same place ), I encountered one traffic delay after another. It was rush hour, but for some reason, this one was worse than usual. It took me about 40 minutes to do that leg of the trip, which should have been half that long.
Then I was done for the day, but had to drive home. I thought I was being smart not taking the freeway, but as that turned out, it wasn't to be so smart today. I had to detour around that, and then the detour had traffic problems.
When it rains, it pours. It seemed like something was causing a delay the entire way back.
Well, at least I made it home in one piece. No road rage and no problems--- other than being a little irritated at how long it all took.
I don't usually write about stuff like this, but that's a different story. Things appear to be getting a bit stale.
It wasn't complicated, but it did go into a high traffic area at the wrong time of the day. On the way, there could have been a road rage incident. In my younger days, I may have partaken in some salty language with an individual that cut me off. Maybe that is a good sign, as things could have been worse. Yet, that wasn't the only thing.
On the way back to drop off ( a credit card that I picked up for a purchase of some items that would go back to the same place ), I encountered one traffic delay after another. It was rush hour, but for some reason, this one was worse than usual. It took me about 40 minutes to do that leg of the trip, which should have been half that long.
Then I was done for the day, but had to drive home. I thought I was being smart not taking the freeway, but as that turned out, it wasn't to be so smart today. I had to detour around that, and then the detour had traffic problems.
When it rains, it pours. It seemed like something was causing a delay the entire way back.
Well, at least I made it home in one piece. No road rage and no problems--- other than being a little irritated at how long it all took.
I don't usually write about stuff like this, but that's a different story. Things appear to be getting a bit stale.
Troops to Baghdad?
A quick commentary on that one, if it is true. As for moi, there's no way that he does this as a change of heart. It is a political move. Every move this dude makes is political. He's not doing this based upon any principle or anything like that. Nobody should be optimistic that we have a real live President in charge now. If he has to act like one for a while, that may be possible. But a real change in heart, forget about it.
Emerging Populism Bursting Washington Bubble
Salena Zito, Real Clear Politics
“Our country is dying. Please pray for all of us,” it says in blue letters on a white board. A bouquet of slightly wilted wildflowers is tied to it with a blue bow.That's how the article begins. It ends differently. It doesn't look like populism, but more like a newer, more savvy bunch of politicians. Actually, that may be an improvement. But please call things by their right names.
The sign doesn't blame anyone in particular; no political brand or elected official is named, no familiar tagline from social media or cable news is part of the message.
Monday, June 16, 2014
Gravity "review"
This isn't a real review. It's just what I think of it. And what is that? It's a movie. It's entertainment.
There's a lot of action and the good guy ( or gal ) makes it back alive. Yay!
Buzz Aldrin seemed to like it, but it seemed to implausible to be really likable to me. Too realistic to be believable, not enough sci-fi to make it sci-fi. In other words, it needed to be more like Star Trek than a documentary. Since it was too much like a documentary, it wasn't believable. If something like this happens for real, nobody comes home. That's the real world.
Whatever. I mean, as far as entertainment goes, it was okay. These kind of movies come a dime a dozen. Nothing memorable about it.
There's a lot of action and the good guy ( or gal ) makes it back alive. Yay!
Buzz Aldrin seemed to like it, but it seemed to implausible to be really likable to me. Too realistic to be believable, not enough sci-fi to make it sci-fi. In other words, it needed to be more like Star Trek than a documentary. Since it was too much like a documentary, it wasn't believable. If something like this happens for real, nobody comes home. That's the real world.
Whatever. I mean, as far as entertainment goes, it was okay. These kind of movies come a dime a dozen. Nothing memorable about it.
Are both parties conspiring to do a bloodless coup de etat?
Now that we are back to square one, or worse, with respect to world wide terrorism, it may be useful to ask what the hell have the politicians been doing for the past almost 13 years?
Anyone with much sense should have known what the Democrats were going to do when they got their chance, and so they have. For the record, they would undo whatever Bush did, and that's what they've done.
The result of that is getting things back to square one. But how is that useful in the fight against terrorism? Are we supposed to believe that 9-11 never happened at all? Or, are we to believe the far left conspiracy buffs who claimed that Bush "let it happen"?
Maybe Bush did "let it happen"! Under this theory, not only did he let it happen, but he did stuff that was guaranteed not to hold up over time. If Bush was this bad, he should have gone to jail. But Obama is just as bad, or worse, because he doing the very things that make us more vulnerable to another attack. In other words, to believe Obama is good is to believe that Bush let it happen, and is therefore, evil. If you really believe that, Bush is an arch criminal and should be locked up. So, why aren't you guys doing that? You won't do that because you don't really believe it yourselves. Or, you just don't care. Actually, I think that it's the latter because the power means more than anything else. So, Bush letting it happen is not useful to you anymore towards that end. That's the real reason you won't prosecute. It would also mean that you don't care if something like 9-11 happens again. The Democrats almost seem jealous that this didn't happen under their watch, even while they were blaming Bush for "letting it happen" under his watch. The lust for power precludes all other considerations, like actually caring about what happens to the country.
The next terror event may be all that's needed to suspend the Constitution altogether. Both parties may agree to this in a show of unity. This freedom and liberty stuff was just too impractical after all. A stronger, more powerful government is what we need, they will say. Unfortunately for freedom-lovers, your freedom's days just may be numbered. What they have done has just about guaranteed it.
Anyone with much sense should have known what the Democrats were going to do when they got their chance, and so they have. For the record, they would undo whatever Bush did, and that's what they've done.
The result of that is getting things back to square one. But how is that useful in the fight against terrorism? Are we supposed to believe that 9-11 never happened at all? Or, are we to believe the far left conspiracy buffs who claimed that Bush "let it happen"?
Maybe Bush did "let it happen"! Under this theory, not only did he let it happen, but he did stuff that was guaranteed not to hold up over time. If Bush was this bad, he should have gone to jail. But Obama is just as bad, or worse, because he doing the very things that make us more vulnerable to another attack. In other words, to believe Obama is good is to believe that Bush let it happen, and is therefore, evil. If you really believe that, Bush is an arch criminal and should be locked up. So, why aren't you guys doing that? You won't do that because you don't really believe it yourselves. Or, you just don't care. Actually, I think that it's the latter because the power means more than anything else. So, Bush letting it happen is not useful to you anymore towards that end. That's the real reason you won't prosecute. It would also mean that you don't care if something like 9-11 happens again. The Democrats almost seem jealous that this didn't happen under their watch, even while they were blaming Bush for "letting it happen" under his watch. The lust for power precludes all other considerations, like actually caring about what happens to the country.
The next terror event may be all that's needed to suspend the Constitution altogether. Both parties may agree to this in a show of unity. This freedom and liberty stuff was just too impractical after all. A stronger, more powerful government is what we need, they will say. Unfortunately for freedom-lovers, your freedom's days just may be numbered. What they have done has just about guaranteed it.
Toyota Throws Down The Glove For Hydrogen Cars; Good News For Platinum Prices | Kitco Commentary
Toyota Throws Down The Glove For Hydrogen Cars; Good News For Platinum Prices | Kitco Commentary
Speculation that Tesla's move to opensource their patents was an indication that their long term prospects are not good. Or, in other words, hydrogen fuel cell technology will win out in the long run.
This would be good for platinum, it is also speculated. However, it is possible to make an affordable fuel cell without using platinum. I've already covered this in a series here.
Speculation that Tesla's move to opensource their patents was an indication that their long term prospects are not good. Or, in other words, hydrogen fuel cell technology will win out in the long run.
This would be good for platinum, it is also speculated. However, it is possible to make an affordable fuel cell without using platinum. I've already covered this in a series here.
Not in the mood to write today
Posting may be light until further notice.
Update:
There was something I thought of writing earlier, and now just remembered it. It goes something like what Barnhardt said about "niceness".
It's how the liberals get people to go along with their ideas. They withhold approval, or they express disapproval. The liberals also teach everybody in the schools to be suckers for approval. I think this fits into the self-esteem thing.
It has been observed that liberalism is a lot like religion. So, instead of telling you that you are going to hell, like a religious person may tell you, the liberals will make a hell on earth for you if you don't go along with them. In order to be a "good person", you have to tow the liberal line. Otherwise, you will be "excommunicated". You will be "evil", even though they don't believe there is such a thing as evil.
We are all being proselytized into the great liberal church. You better believe or else.
Update a little while later:
We have a Ricimer in the White House. Ricimer dismantled what was left of the Roman Empire. Obama is doing the same to the United States. The good is being driven out by the bad.
Another update:
With respect to being "bad", the Christians have no power to punish you, but the secularists do. That's why they are winning. They hijacked religion and put it into service of the state. That is supposed to be illegal, but what does that matter anymore?
Update:
There was something I thought of writing earlier, and now just remembered it. It goes something like what Barnhardt said about "niceness".
It's how the liberals get people to go along with their ideas. They withhold approval, or they express disapproval. The liberals also teach everybody in the schools to be suckers for approval. I think this fits into the self-esteem thing.
It has been observed that liberalism is a lot like religion. So, instead of telling you that you are going to hell, like a religious person may tell you, the liberals will make a hell on earth for you if you don't go along with them. In order to be a "good person", you have to tow the liberal line. Otherwise, you will be "excommunicated". You will be "evil", even though they don't believe there is such a thing as evil.
We are all being proselytized into the great liberal church. You better believe or else.
Update a little while later:
We have a Ricimer in the White House. Ricimer dismantled what was left of the Roman Empire. Obama is doing the same to the United States. The good is being driven out by the bad.
Another update:
With respect to being "bad", the Christians have no power to punish you, but the secularists do. That's why they are winning. They hijacked religion and put it into service of the state. That is supposed to be illegal, but what does that matter anymore?
Sunday, June 15, 2014
austin powers (part 2) very badly hurt
I'm going to watch a movie.
Update:
It was Gravity. Actually, that movie reminds me of what this household looks like right now. Everything is falling apart.
Update:
It was Gravity. Actually, that movie reminds me of what this household looks like right now. Everything is falling apart.
An alternative view of Bush 41's breaking the "read my lips" promise
In the Fate of Empires post, Sir John Glubb points out the selfishness-over-service traits of the leadership of a failing empire. I'm correlating this with what President George Herbert Walker Bush had to say about his breaking the "no new taxes" pledge he made at the 1988 Republican nominating convention. What he said was that he knew that the tax increase was not good for him politically, but good for the nation. In other words, he put the nation's interests ahead of his own.
The conservatives went berserk on him, and it was a just response, but perhaps not the wisest one. Bush did violate his pledge, but his intentions were consistent with the long term interests of the nation. Keeping the pledge may have worked better for him politically, but he declined to do that, as he pointed out.
Here's what may be conservative heresy: the conservatives should not have abandoned him, despite his betrayal. When they did, they behaved in selfish manner that is inconsistent with the long term interests of the nation, as defined by Glubb. This opened the door for the Democrats and gave us Clinton, and eventually Obama.
The people didn't abandon Bush because he violated his pledge. They probably saw how the conservatives abandoned their own President, and must have said to themselves, "why should we support them when they won't support their own President."
Bush did say that he should have "gotten a better deal". The better deal would be an agreement to raise taxes if the Democrats would pass a balanced budget amendment and send it to the states. At least Bush could have said he got something commensurate with the violation of his pledge.
The conservatives went berserk on him, and it was a just response, but perhaps not the wisest one. Bush did violate his pledge, but his intentions were consistent with the long term interests of the nation. Keeping the pledge may have worked better for him politically, but he declined to do that, as he pointed out.
Here's what may be conservative heresy: the conservatives should not have abandoned him, despite his betrayal. When they did, they behaved in selfish manner that is inconsistent with the long term interests of the nation, as defined by Glubb. This opened the door for the Democrats and gave us Clinton, and eventually Obama.
The people didn't abandon Bush because he violated his pledge. They probably saw how the conservatives abandoned their own President, and must have said to themselves, "why should we support them when they won't support their own President."
Bush did say that he should have "gotten a better deal". The better deal would be an agreement to raise taxes if the Democrats would pass a balanced budget amendment and send it to the states. At least Bush could have said he got something commensurate with the violation of his pledge.
Can Man Intervene in Predestined Events? - RobertRinger.com
Can Man Intervene in Predestined Events? - RobertRinger.com
comment:
Ringer describes how his nephew died in a car crash. The discussion then turns to morality. Now, my understanding of good and evil is this: good and evil involve the choice of an individual. If no choice can be made, then there can be no evil. In the example given, there can be no evil if there was no human choice being made--- the event appeared random. Assuming that this determination is the correct one, why the discussion of morality? Nobody is at fault and there's no one to blame. Yet the blame isn't being directed at the individuals, but at morality and God. For if God doesn't intervene in such situations, how can God be good?
The reason I mention this is that the discussion seems haywire. For example, a hypothetical: if a wild animal attacks and kills a person, which is not that uncommon, has an evil thing occurred? The animal has no morality, for it is an animal. If there was a choice being made, it was the individual's choice to be where he was at the time. But do you blame the man for the act of an animal? I dunno. But, how does God figure into this?
Here's a big example: Let's say a huge asteroid is discovered to be approaching Earth and there's nothing that can be done to stop it. The asteroid will kill everybody. Is this evil? If God allows it, is God good?
If there's any morality, it had to come from the people on Earth. If God allowed it, could it mean that people aren't good and God didn't intervene to save the people? A person's death does not imply that person was innocent, even if that person didn't cause the event at all.
Also, if people could do something to help themselves, like building rockets that could divert such an asteroid, then whose fault is it when this isn't done?
The closest thing to pure evil, in my opinion, is to kill an innocent person when you know that person is indeed innocent. This has happened and if you read closely enough, you know what I'm referring to.
Good and evil come from people. My two cents.
Update:
Question: If you are atheist, is there such a thing as good and evil? If there is, why is evil so? In other words, if we are no better than the beasts, then why does anything unpleasant that can happen matter one way or another? An example: if we are no better than animals, then an asteroid that destroys mankind would be no different than the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs, right?
If there is no such thing as evil, then why is it wrong to murder someone?
comment:
Ringer describes how his nephew died in a car crash. The discussion then turns to morality. Now, my understanding of good and evil is this: good and evil involve the choice of an individual. If no choice can be made, then there can be no evil. In the example given, there can be no evil if there was no human choice being made--- the event appeared random. Assuming that this determination is the correct one, why the discussion of morality? Nobody is at fault and there's no one to blame. Yet the blame isn't being directed at the individuals, but at morality and God. For if God doesn't intervene in such situations, how can God be good?
The reason I mention this is that the discussion seems haywire. For example, a hypothetical: if a wild animal attacks and kills a person, which is not that uncommon, has an evil thing occurred? The animal has no morality, for it is an animal. If there was a choice being made, it was the individual's choice to be where he was at the time. But do you blame the man for the act of an animal? I dunno. But, how does God figure into this?
Here's a big example: Let's say a huge asteroid is discovered to be approaching Earth and there's nothing that can be done to stop it. The asteroid will kill everybody. Is this evil? If God allows it, is God good?
If there's any morality, it had to come from the people on Earth. If God allowed it, could it mean that people aren't good and God didn't intervene to save the people? A person's death does not imply that person was innocent, even if that person didn't cause the event at all.
Also, if people could do something to help themselves, like building rockets that could divert such an asteroid, then whose fault is it when this isn't done?
The closest thing to pure evil, in my opinion, is to kill an innocent person when you know that person is indeed innocent. This has happened and if you read closely enough, you know what I'm referring to.
Good and evil come from people. My two cents.
Update:
Question: If you are atheist, is there such a thing as good and evil? If there is, why is evil so? In other words, if we are no better than the beasts, then why does anything unpleasant that can happen matter one way or another? An example: if we are no better than animals, then an asteroid that destroys mankind would be no different than the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs, right?
If there is no such thing as evil, then why is it wrong to murder someone?
Obama Even Worse Than We Thought
Commentary Mag
Who's this "we" stuff? I NEVER thought this guy was anything but bad news. The link came via Instapundit, who I recall wasn't all that tough on the bamster in 2008. World class wussism isn't going to get it, y'all. Walkin' Tall ain't exactly credible now. We're getting to the point where stuff needs to happen and not just words or letters to the editor.
Who's this "we" stuff? I NEVER thought this guy was anything but bad news. The link came via Instapundit, who I recall wasn't all that tough on the bamster in 2008. World class wussism isn't going to get it, y'all. Walkin' Tall ain't exactly credible now. We're getting to the point where stuff needs to happen and not just words or letters to the editor.
Is America on the brink of economic and social collapse?
PJ Media--- Future Fear
More Fate of Empires stuff, if that's your kind of thing.
I've got other stuff to worry about. Just got my auto insurance renewal. Sticker shock. The world is coming to an end.
It is not farfetched to assume that such an ongoing concatenation of events as we have enumerated may well comprise a deliberate project meant to inflame social unrest and bring about a civil crisis that would facilitate the ostensible goal of the Obama administration, namely, the “fundamental transformation” of the republic into a socialist welfare state — or a de facto one-party system.--- David Solway
More Fate of Empires stuff, if that's your kind of thing.
I've got other stuff to worry about. Just got my auto insurance renewal. Sticker shock. The world is coming to an end.
The Fate of Empires
Sir John Glubb, h/t Parapundit
A twenty six page pdf that I'm reading now. Will report on it later today if I have the time.
Already, I am seeing signs that confirm what I've been writing about.
Excerpts:
comment:
Where are we on this life cycle? It doesn't look good.
Update:
One notable except to the 10 generation rule that Glubb postulates is of Byzantium. After the fall of the Empire in the West, the Eastern half lived on for nearly a thousand years. The same analysis does apply otherwise, however.
What made Byzantium different? It's capital was very difficult to attack. As long as the capital of the Empire could not be attacked, it could regroup again and again. So, it did.
The lesson to be learned is to have strong defensible positions. Perhaps an empire can regenerate itself if it has the opportunity.
A twenty six page pdf that I'm reading now. Will report on it later today if I have the time.
Already, I am seeing signs that confirm what I've been writing about.
Excerpts:
- There does not appear to be any doubt that
money is the agent which causes the decline
of this strong, brave and self-confident
people. The decline in courage, enterprise
and a sense of duty is, however, gradual. - beneath the surface, greed for money is
gradually replacing duty and public service.
Indeed the change might be summarised as
being from service to selfishness. - Money being in better supply than courage,
subsidies instead of weapons are employed
to buy off enemies. - The heroes of declining nations are always
the same—the athlete, the singer or the
actor. The word ‘celebrity’ today is used to
designate a comedian or a football player,
not a statesman, a general, or a literary
genius. - An increase in the influence of women in
public life has often been associated with national
decline. - The resulting increase
in confusion and violence made it unsafe for
women to move unescorted in the streets,
with the result that this feminist movement
collapsed. - In recent years, the idea has spread widely
in the West that ‘progress’ will be automatic
without effort, that everyone will continue to
grow richer and richer and that every year
will show a ‘rise in the standard of living’. We
have not drawn from history the obvious
conclusion that material success is the result
of courage, endurance and hard work—a
conclusion nevertheless obvious from the
history of the meteoric rise of our own
ancestors - It may perhaps be incorrect to picture the
welfare state as the high-water mark of
human attainment. It may merely prove to
be one more regular milestone in the lifestory
of an ageing and decrepit empire. - But this spirit of dedication was slowly
eroded in the Age of Commerce by the action
of money. People make money for
themselves, not for their country. Thus
periods of affluence gradually dissolved the
spirit of service, which had caused the rise of
the imperial races. - Decadence is a moral and spiritual disease,
resulting from too long a period of wealth
and power, producing cynicism, decline of
religion, pessimism and frivolity. The
citizens of such a nation will no longer make
an effort to save themselves, because they
are not convinced that anything in life is
worth saving. - There is some value in comparing the lives
of nations to those of individuals...The
characteristics of childhood, adolescence,
youth, middle and old age are well known... - Yet, in fact, the history of the Arab imperial
age—from conquest through commercialism,
to affluence, intellectualism, science and
decadence—is an exact precursor of British
imperial history and lasted almost exactly
the same time. - Any regime which attains great wealth and power
seems with remarkable regularity to decay
and fall apart in some ten generations. - (d) The stages of the rise and fall of great
nations seem to be:
The Age of Pioneers (outburst)
The Age of Conquests
The Age of Commerce
The Age of Affluence
The Age of Intellect
The Age of Decadence.
Where are we on this life cycle? It doesn't look good.
Update:
One notable except to the 10 generation rule that Glubb postulates is of Byzantium. After the fall of the Empire in the West, the Eastern half lived on for nearly a thousand years. The same analysis does apply otherwise, however.
What made Byzantium different? It's capital was very difficult to attack. As long as the capital of the Empire could not be attacked, it could regroup again and again. So, it did.
The lesson to be learned is to have strong defensible positions. Perhaps an empire can regenerate itself if it has the opportunity.
Next Big Future: NASA NIAC - two orders of magnitude mass and power...
Next Big Future: NASA NIAC - two orders of magnitude mass and power...: The abundant high-energy light in space (with wavelengths as low as 190 nm, compared to 300 nm on Earth) makes the TiO2 co-catalyst an ideal...
A 600 days Mars mission often have ECLSS that would weigh about 19 tons using chemical oxygen and CO2 scrubber systems. They then try to alter the design components to get the weight down to 4 tons. The NIAC project could bring the weight down to 200 kilograms or less.With that weight reduction, much less mass needs to be lifted making the mission all that more feasible and cheaper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)