via TransTerrestrial Musings.
The link links to another article that thoroughly analyzes the race thus far.
Basically, you have three candidates now. Trump, Cruz, and Rubio. The analysis favors Rubio, Cruz, and Trump in that order.
You can kid yourself in a number of ways. What puzzles me is why so many on the GOP side decided to dislike a guy who has a number of proposals that would actually work to solve problems, while nobody else seems to have come up with anything comparable.
Perhaps you could count Cruz's gold position as something comparable. Maybe. Winston Churchill tried to take the UK back to the gold standard, but it didn't work out.
Basically, you go for Rubio based upon his perceived ability to defeat Hillary. Cruz maybe not so much. Trump not at all, based upon this analysis.
This assumes that Trump even gets the nomination.
What do I think?
Not smart enough to know for sure. I think Trump wins the whole shooting match.
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, December 19, 2015
End of Obama regime?
Somebody claims to have the goods on Obama
comment:
They had the blue dress too (Monica Blewhimsky) , but did that make any difference?
comment:
They had the blue dress too (Monica Blewhimsky) , but did that make any difference?
A Simple Trick to Install Baseboard Corners Perfectly
There are so many videos like this. I don't know if I can use this technique for anything or not, but it sure is interesting.
Cheech and Chong -- "Coke" scene
Hadn't seen this one before. At least, not that I can recall.
Pretty funny.
Pretty funny.
What does it mean to be a Republican?
You keep hearing things like Trump isn't a real Republican. What the hell is that? Look at what Limbaugh says about the latest budget deal. Yep, the victory in 2014 was meaningless in terms of budget policy. You might as well have Pelosi running the House, and Reid running the Senate again. So, tell me again: what is a Republican?
Oh, they got the okay to export oil. I've got news for you. The price of oil is plummeting. If they think that the US is going to become a big oil exporter, fuggeddabout it. These people basically got NOTHING for all their concessions. N.O.T.H.I.N.G. The price of oil coming down was inevitable. Guess what? The US is not the low cost producer of oil. Saudi Arabia is. We'll be more dependent upon oil than ever before this one gets done. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid. The right to oil exporting is nothing when you are priced out of the market. Sheesh.
If you can't muster any opposition to Planned Parenthood butchering babies for money, then what claim do you have upon principle?
If Donald Trump really isn't a Republican, then so what? None of the rest honor what they supposedly are in support of anyway.
Oh, they got the okay to export oil. I've got news for you. The price of oil is plummeting. If they think that the US is going to become a big oil exporter, fuggeddabout it. These people basically got NOTHING for all their concessions. N.O.T.H.I.N.G. The price of oil coming down was inevitable. Guess what? The US is not the low cost producer of oil. Saudi Arabia is. We'll be more dependent upon oil than ever before this one gets done. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid. The right to oil exporting is nothing when you are priced out of the market. Sheesh.
If you can't muster any opposition to Planned Parenthood butchering babies for money, then what claim do you have upon principle?
If Donald Trump really isn't a Republican, then so what? None of the rest honor what they supposedly are in support of anyway.
Frog and Scorpion ( reposted for second time )
There's a cartoon in which an Islamic scorpion is riding atop a European frog while swimming across.
This repost doesn't address the Islam per se, but it does address their protectors in this society. There are those who call the cartoon "racist". The point of using the word "racist" is to shut up any discussion. There are very legitimate reasons for keeping Muslims out of America. But our so-called leaders are not very intelligent, nor very wise.
If one comes to the fore, like Trump, who would shut down the Islamization of America, their response is to charge him with racism, or to shut up.
Hence, the repost...
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
When it comes to this Climate of Hate stuff, I am reminded of the story of the Frog and Scorpion. It took me a long circuitous route in order to get to this conclusion and it requires some explanation.
This charge being made of "vitriolic" rhetoric that is somehow connected to the shootings in Arizona appears to me to very dishonest. It is the kind of dishonesty that you find in liberals. Surely they are not so dumb as to believe that a few words is going to cause bad things to happen, for if they really believed that, they would tone down their own language. Liberals are not necessarily stupid, despite their appearances sometimes. They just have this problem with basic concepts like integrity, honesty and honor. Use those words around a liberal, and you'll get a sneering response. It is so old fashioned to them.
It reminds me of what Leo Durocher used to say: "Nice guys finish last." Politics is a tough competitive occupation, not unlike competitive sports. Knocking the other guy silly in order to get an edge is okay if you can get away with it. In fact, it ought to be expected. Hence you get the response that the Mahablog had, in which I referenced in an earlier post. Any complaints about the rough tactics are attributed to weakness on the protestors part. Never mind the fact that it is the very same thing that the critics are saying themselves. The critics want their adversaries to tone it down, but that won't be reciprocated. Even more, not only will it not be reciprocated, but any complaints will be characterized as crybabying.
But their is no honor no integrity in the charge. Never mind that, they'll say. Nice guys finish last.
It may be a little starry eyed of me, but I do think that conservatives do care more about honor and integrity than the liberals. I'll buttress that opinion with a few facts which can't be denied. When a conservative breaks a promise, like George H.W. Bush's "read my lips" promise not to raise taxes, the betrayal is taken very seriously. But if a liberal, like Clinton says he "didn't have sex with that woman", and it turns out to be a lie, nobody seems to be shocked. The two sides are judged by different standards. Or to put it more accurately, one side gets judged by its own standards and the other doesn't get judged because it has no standards to begin with.
When I think of liberals, I think of them as the Al Capone types. That may seem a bit harsh, but let me explain. In his book "Success Through a Positive Mental Atttitude", Napoleon Hill discusses his interview with the notorious gangster. When Hill asked Capone why he did the things he did, Capone said "I had to." He felt it was necessary for him to be dishonest. But Hill points out that necessity has nothing to do with the choice of being dishonest. Dishonesty is a choice, nobody forces anybody to be dishonest. Nobody forced Capone to be a gangster. That was his choice. Yet Capone no doubt believed that he was being forced into becoming a gangster. People can rationalize any behavior if it suits them in some way. If it suits the liberals to lie about the conservatives, in particular about a certain tragic event, why they'll just say that they have to. And they'll feel perfectly justified in doing so.
So that brings me back to the Frog and Scorpion parable. It is in the Scorpions' nature to sting the Frog while the Frog is carrying the Scorpion to safety even though it will kill the both of them. The Scorpion can't help itself. It would prefer death to them both than to have his enemies succeed or survive. The Scorpion isn't motivated by good will, but by enmity. Therefore, you can't believe what the "Scorpions" say. If you do, and you trust them, you go down the drink with them.
Update:
This is being reposted from almost two years ago after the Gifford shooting in Arizona. It is about the "Climate of Hate" charge leveled at the right and how the left was attempting to say that this climate caused the shooting.
It is especially important now with what is happening in the election. They may charge the same climate of hate is what is bringing Obama down, if that is indeed what is happening ( Obama going down).
The gold standard is the truth. Obama didn't trust us with the truth. His excuse will be the same as Capone's.
This repost doesn't address the Islam per se, but it does address their protectors in this society. There are those who call the cartoon "racist". The point of using the word "racist" is to shut up any discussion. There are very legitimate reasons for keeping Muslims out of America. But our so-called leaders are not very intelligent, nor very wise.
If one comes to the fore, like Trump, who would shut down the Islamization of America, their response is to charge him with racism, or to shut up.
Hence, the repost...
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
When it comes to this Climate of Hate stuff, I am reminded of the story of the Frog and Scorpion. It took me a long circuitous route in order to get to this conclusion and it requires some explanation.
This charge being made of "vitriolic" rhetoric that is somehow connected to the shootings in Arizona appears to me to very dishonest. It is the kind of dishonesty that you find in liberals. Surely they are not so dumb as to believe that a few words is going to cause bad things to happen, for if they really believed that, they would tone down their own language. Liberals are not necessarily stupid, despite their appearances sometimes. They just have this problem with basic concepts like integrity, honesty and honor. Use those words around a liberal, and you'll get a sneering response. It is so old fashioned to them.
It reminds me of what Leo Durocher used to say: "Nice guys finish last." Politics is a tough competitive occupation, not unlike competitive sports. Knocking the other guy silly in order to get an edge is okay if you can get away with it. In fact, it ought to be expected. Hence you get the response that the Mahablog had, in which I referenced in an earlier post. Any complaints about the rough tactics are attributed to weakness on the protestors part. Never mind the fact that it is the very same thing that the critics are saying themselves. The critics want their adversaries to tone it down, but that won't be reciprocated. Even more, not only will it not be reciprocated, but any complaints will be characterized as crybabying.
But their is no honor no integrity in the charge. Never mind that, they'll say. Nice guys finish last.
It may be a little starry eyed of me, but I do think that conservatives do care more about honor and integrity than the liberals. I'll buttress that opinion with a few facts which can't be denied. When a conservative breaks a promise, like George H.W. Bush's "read my lips" promise not to raise taxes, the betrayal is taken very seriously. But if a liberal, like Clinton says he "didn't have sex with that woman", and it turns out to be a lie, nobody seems to be shocked. The two sides are judged by different standards. Or to put it more accurately, one side gets judged by its own standards and the other doesn't get judged because it has no standards to begin with.
When I think of liberals, I think of them as the Al Capone types. That may seem a bit harsh, but let me explain. In his book "Success Through a Positive Mental Atttitude", Napoleon Hill discusses his interview with the notorious gangster. When Hill asked Capone why he did the things he did, Capone said "I had to." He felt it was necessary for him to be dishonest. But Hill points out that necessity has nothing to do with the choice of being dishonest. Dishonesty is a choice, nobody forces anybody to be dishonest. Nobody forced Capone to be a gangster. That was his choice. Yet Capone no doubt believed that he was being forced into becoming a gangster. People can rationalize any behavior if it suits them in some way. If it suits the liberals to lie about the conservatives, in particular about a certain tragic event, why they'll just say that they have to. And they'll feel perfectly justified in doing so.
So that brings me back to the Frog and Scorpion parable. It is in the Scorpions' nature to sting the Frog while the Frog is carrying the Scorpion to safety even though it will kill the both of them. The Scorpion can't help itself. It would prefer death to them both than to have his enemies succeed or survive. The Scorpion isn't motivated by good will, but by enmity. Therefore, you can't believe what the "Scorpions" say. If you do, and you trust them, you go down the drink with them.
Update:
This is being reposted from almost two years ago after the Gifford shooting in Arizona. It is about the "Climate of Hate" charge leveled at the right and how the left was attempting to say that this climate caused the shooting.
It is especially important now with what is happening in the election. They may charge the same climate of hate is what is bringing Obama down, if that is indeed what is happening ( Obama going down).
The gold standard is the truth. Obama didn't trust us with the truth. His excuse will be the same as Capone's.
Friday, December 18, 2015
ParaPundit: Mistake To Overthrow Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gadhafi
ParaPundit: Mistake To Overthrow Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gadhafi
comment:
The author was quite emphatic about his opposition to the Iraq War from the beginning. I've been reading his blog for a long, long time-- I know. His opposition to Iraq is part of the reason for its failure, which I will note below.
Now, here's the problem: Sure Bush made a mistake going into Iraq. But why was it a mistake? Not because of what would happen over there ( rise of Isis was not due to the invasion, but the failure of it ), but for what happened over HERE ( which caused the failure in the first place ).
Bush could not sustain the political will to see the operation to a final, successful conclusion. He won the war ( so did Nixon in Vietnam ), but lost the peace ( so did Nixon when he had to resign because of Watergate ).
In each instance, the biggest problem with the war was with the political left. For example, Nixon's failure was understandable in the sense that he inherited Vietnam. Bush's failure is that he chose a policy that could not be sustained over the time period required. America cannot sustain such wars for such a long period because of the political left. Nixon didn't choose Vietnam, but Bush chose Iraq. Nixon's failure was unavoidable, but Bush's was. ( Both failed to take into account the left. ) Bush should have learned from Nixon, but he did worse in choosing a war that he could not see to a final successful conclusion. The left was going to demolish whatever he accomplished in Iraq, and so they did. In summary then, Bush failed to learn from history. We should know from history that the political left will not allow America to win a war.
The big payoff for the left was the election of Barack Hussein Obama. Instead of getting back at Bush, as with Nixon, they got back at America, which initially supported Bush. So America is punished with a leftist president determined to make her suffer.
I had a bad feeling about the invasion of Iraq, and I was right. Nothing good could come from a strategic error like that. If you cannot keep the left at bay, you are going to lose a war. So, don't get into a war, and especially a long one.
Unfortunately, being right isn't good enough. Not even for something as simple as getting credit for being right.
The world doesn't work that way.
I'll be right about a lot more things before its over. But I won't profit from it, most likely.
comment:
The author was quite emphatic about his opposition to the Iraq War from the beginning. I've been reading his blog for a long, long time-- I know. His opposition to Iraq is part of the reason for its failure, which I will note below.
Now, here's the problem: Sure Bush made a mistake going into Iraq. But why was it a mistake? Not because of what would happen over there ( rise of Isis was not due to the invasion, but the failure of it ), but for what happened over HERE ( which caused the failure in the first place ).
Bush could not sustain the political will to see the operation to a final, successful conclusion. He won the war ( so did Nixon in Vietnam ), but lost the peace ( so did Nixon when he had to resign because of Watergate ).
In each instance, the biggest problem with the war was with the political left. For example, Nixon's failure was understandable in the sense that he inherited Vietnam. Bush's failure is that he chose a policy that could not be sustained over the time period required. America cannot sustain such wars for such a long period because of the political left. Nixon didn't choose Vietnam, but Bush chose Iraq. Nixon's failure was unavoidable, but Bush's was. ( Both failed to take into account the left. ) Bush should have learned from Nixon, but he did worse in choosing a war that he could not see to a final successful conclusion. The left was going to demolish whatever he accomplished in Iraq, and so they did. In summary then, Bush failed to learn from history. We should know from history that the political left will not allow America to win a war.
The big payoff for the left was the election of Barack Hussein Obama. Instead of getting back at Bush, as with Nixon, they got back at America, which initially supported Bush. So America is punished with a leftist president determined to make her suffer.
I had a bad feeling about the invasion of Iraq, and I was right. Nothing good could come from a strategic error like that. If you cannot keep the left at bay, you are going to lose a war. So, don't get into a war, and especially a long one.
Unfortunately, being right isn't good enough. Not even for something as simple as getting credit for being right.
The world doesn't work that way.
I'll be right about a lot more things before its over. But I won't profit from it, most likely.
Bad medicine kemosabe
Lots of things are at the moment.
I'm not working today. Things are bad. Still hoping for the best, though.
With my free time, been looking around the web. The Fed raised rates and the stock market is taking it kinda hard. The markets are quite treacherous, even in good times. There was something on Kitco that makes it seem like a bear market in staring us in the face. That's for stocks. For gold? Seems like some are predicting hard times there, but wait... gold is up today. Bonds are up too, so perhaps we are seeing a flight to safety.
Dick Morris caught Hillary in another lie.
Hillary looks Machiavellian. I saw something on Ace of Spades that will test you and see how much you are on the dark side. I took the test. But I won't share the results with you. How Machiavellian of me.
But mine is nothing compared to Hillary. She can try on the Darth suit any time now. Darth Hillary! Bwah, hah, hah!
Seriously, how does this woman stay in the race at all? We must have a country full of Darth Hillarys.
Bad medicine, kemosabe.
Morris also said that Cruz thumped Rubio in the debate. I recall that a Rubio supporter didn't take it well. If they bolt the party because of a Trump Cruz possibility, then that too is bad medicine kemosabe.
Looking bad all around. Yeah, and this old computer is limping along looking like it may not last much longer.
I'm not working today. Things are bad. Still hoping for the best, though.
With my free time, been looking around the web. The Fed raised rates and the stock market is taking it kinda hard. The markets are quite treacherous, even in good times. There was something on Kitco that makes it seem like a bear market in staring us in the face. That's for stocks. For gold? Seems like some are predicting hard times there, but wait... gold is up today. Bonds are up too, so perhaps we are seeing a flight to safety.
Dick Morris caught Hillary in another lie.
Hillary looks Machiavellian. I saw something on Ace of Spades that will test you and see how much you are on the dark side. I took the test. But I won't share the results with you. How Machiavellian of me.
But mine is nothing compared to Hillary. She can try on the Darth suit any time now. Darth Hillary! Bwah, hah, hah!
Seriously, how does this woman stay in the race at all? We must have a country full of Darth Hillarys.
Bad medicine, kemosabe.
Morris also said that Cruz thumped Rubio in the debate. I recall that a Rubio supporter didn't take it well. If they bolt the party because of a Trump Cruz possibility, then that too is bad medicine kemosabe.
Looking bad all around. Yeah, and this old computer is limping along looking like it may not last much longer.
If this isn't true, then the postmodernists are right
Gospel of John 4:19
People make such a big deal out of little things.
If God isn't for truth, then there can be no God. I'm sure that the postmodernists would agree, even though they don't believe that truth exists anyway.
I thought that reproved was a bit archaic, so I looked it up. It means gentle correction. So evil hates even gentle correction. Sounds right to me!And this is the condemnation;that light has come into the world,and men loved darkness rather than light,because their deeds were evil.For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light,neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds be reproved.But he that doeth truth cometh to the light,that his deeds may be made manifest,that they are wrought in God.
People make such a big deal out of little things.
If God isn't for truth, then there can be no God. I'm sure that the postmodernists would agree, even though they don't believe that truth exists anyway.
About that metal worker demonstration
It is excellent. I hoped to do something like that with the theory of global warming. But words aren't enough. You really have to show what you are talking about. How do you show, in a demonstration like this, that man-made global warming ( AGW ) is false?
Perhaps you don't need to really. Just consider this--- all of the argument depends upon the notion that a gas will trap heat. Then, to demonstrate this, you would have to show something that shows the unsuitability of gases in general to trap heat. Gases aren't any good at that, and it is a good thing, because if they weren't, your automobile's engine couldn't run.
What makes the engine run is the fact that gases will expand in the presence of heat. It will expand proportionally to the amount of heat. The greater the heat, the greater the expansion. So, you take a small amount of gas, heat it up in an explosion that takes place in the cylinder of an engine, and that expansion causes a powerful force to push the piston down. The downward push of the piston causes the crankshaft to rotate, which is transmitted to the wheels of your car, and your car can move. Without this property of gases, otherwise known as the Gas Law, your car couldn't move.
What happens to the gas when it expands? It cools back down. It's a beautiful thing. By the time it reaches the exhaust pipe, it has already cooled down considerably. If it hadn't, it would be a fire hazard.
So, considering this fact, which is the Gas Law, how can it be possible then, that gases can hold heat?
It is an absurd contention.
Auto engines aren't the only example. Take hot air balloons. If the hot air inside the balloon didn't expand, the balloon wouldn't rise. That's because as the air expands when heated inside the balloon, it becomes less dense than the surrounding air. As it become less dense, it is then capable of rising, as a bubble rises in water. If air didn't expand when hot, the balloon stays on the ground.
Another example? Fire pistons. These little gizmos may save your life some day. They work on the principles of the Gas Laws. You compress the gas in a tiny cylinder, which makes it HOT. Hot enough to start a fire. If this didn't happen, fire pistons would be useless to start fires. Why does it get hot? Because the temperature is contained within the gas. As it is compressed, it is in a smaller region, and thus it has to heat up. Temperature is proportional to volume. There's an equation for it--- PV equals nRT. Where pressure equals p, v equals volume, and n is number of molecules ( moles ), and r is a constant for all gases, while T is temperature. The equation shows that pressure times volume is directly proportional to temperature. Thus, as pressure increases in the piston, so must the temperature. A fire piston! A beautiful thing.
AGW isn't science. It is a fraud.
Perhaps you don't need to really. Just consider this--- all of the argument depends upon the notion that a gas will trap heat. Then, to demonstrate this, you would have to show something that shows the unsuitability of gases in general to trap heat. Gases aren't any good at that, and it is a good thing, because if they weren't, your automobile's engine couldn't run.
What makes the engine run is the fact that gases will expand in the presence of heat. It will expand proportionally to the amount of heat. The greater the heat, the greater the expansion. So, you take a small amount of gas, heat it up in an explosion that takes place in the cylinder of an engine, and that expansion causes a powerful force to push the piston down. The downward push of the piston causes the crankshaft to rotate, which is transmitted to the wheels of your car, and your car can move. Without this property of gases, otherwise known as the Gas Law, your car couldn't move.
What happens to the gas when it expands? It cools back down. It's a beautiful thing. By the time it reaches the exhaust pipe, it has already cooled down considerably. If it hadn't, it would be a fire hazard.
So, considering this fact, which is the Gas Law, how can it be possible then, that gases can hold heat?
It is an absurd contention.
Auto engines aren't the only example. Take hot air balloons. If the hot air inside the balloon didn't expand, the balloon wouldn't rise. That's because as the air expands when heated inside the balloon, it becomes less dense than the surrounding air. As it become less dense, it is then capable of rising, as a bubble rises in water. If air didn't expand when hot, the balloon stays on the ground.
Another example? Fire pistons. These little gizmos may save your life some day. They work on the principles of the Gas Laws. You compress the gas in a tiny cylinder, which makes it HOT. Hot enough to start a fire. If this didn't happen, fire pistons would be useless to start fires. Why does it get hot? Because the temperature is contained within the gas. As it is compressed, it is in a smaller region, and thus it has to heat up. Temperature is proportional to volume. There's an equation for it--- PV equals nRT. Where pressure equals p, v equals volume, and n is number of molecules ( moles ), and r is a constant for all gases, while T is temperature. The equation shows that pressure times volume is directly proportional to temperature. Thus, as pressure increases in the piston, so must the temperature. A fire piston! A beautiful thing.
AGW isn't science. It is a fraud.
Obligatory, 12.18.15; If it wasn't official before, it is now. Michael Moore is an idiot.
"And while we’re on the topic of New York, food and jihad, Michael Moore holds up ‘We Are All Muslim’ sign at Trump Tower."- Instapunidit
Let's see Michael Moore pray five times and day and make the pilgrimage to Mecca. Let's see he join his Muslim brethren, and call for sharia in the United States. Let's see him join Isis and join the jihad, so that dream can be realized!
What a complete and total idiot.
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Noon break; 12.17.15; Light chores about the house
This new schedule of mine will have a few hours in the middle of the day for me to do things that I'd like to do. Under the old schedule, all these things had to be put off for the weekend.
Isn't that nice?
If there's a problem with it, it's too short. I'd like more time. Always more time.
But that's not what I'm going to focus on right now. It's been almost two weeks since the last post on the trip out west, and preparations for the move out there.
So, with my spare time, I threw out some more junk. I'd like to get this pile of junk down to the bare minimum. How much junk can I take with me? I'd like to use as much of this stuff as I can, but that may be totally unrealistic.
Briefly, the plan is to convert the van to an RV. Then take this trailer I've got, and convert it to something that can be shelter that I can pull along with me. If I were to follow this option, the moving van is out. Which kinda looks like the right choice because spending money is just not the ticket. The less that I have to spend the better. That means the van, the trailer, and the car will be the biggest pieces. What to do with the car? If I have a trailer, how do I accommodate a car in that entourage as well?
I considered at one time a rental space for the car. It will stay in town, and the van plus trailer will go back and forth between town and country. I can be town rat and country rat at the same time. What versatility!
The costs would be for the time I was in town at an RV spot, plus the cost of the storage spot. Plus traveling costs back and forth between town and country.
Prev Next
Isn't that nice?
If there's a problem with it, it's too short. I'd like more time. Always more time.
But that's not what I'm going to focus on right now. It's been almost two weeks since the last post on the trip out west, and preparations for the move out there.
So, with my spare time, I threw out some more junk. I'd like to get this pile of junk down to the bare minimum. How much junk can I take with me? I'd like to use as much of this stuff as I can, but that may be totally unrealistic.
Briefly, the plan is to convert the van to an RV. Then take this trailer I've got, and convert it to something that can be shelter that I can pull along with me. If I were to follow this option, the moving van is out. Which kinda looks like the right choice because spending money is just not the ticket. The less that I have to spend the better. That means the van, the trailer, and the car will be the biggest pieces. What to do with the car? If I have a trailer, how do I accommodate a car in that entourage as well?
I considered at one time a rental space for the car. It will stay in town, and the van plus trailer will go back and forth between town and country. I can be town rat and country rat at the same time. What versatility!
The costs would be for the time I was in town at an RV spot, plus the cost of the storage spot. Plus traveling costs back and forth between town and country.
Prev Next
Obligatory, 12.17.15; Last full week before Xmas
What's this "Xmas"? It's what it used to be called. Maybe it is just called "holidays" these days. This political correctness stuff may have been around a little longer than you think.
Not to get into religion or anything. The latest topic has been politics.
I checked out Limbaugh just now, and didn't really see anything in his headlines that grabbed my attention, so I read sort of a summary of the debate. Not too different than mine.
But yesterday went by so fast, and today is going by so fast that I didn't get to expound a little on my thoughts.
I keep hearing about how Trump's ideas are "nonserious". Really? Well, let me tell you. If there's anybody in this race that is saying something serious in terms of what would work against terrorism and illegal immigration, and even against drugs, it is this guy. Who the heck has been "nonserious" all these years if it isn't the GOP? At times, these guys sound just like the Democrats. If they sound just like the Democrats, what good are they for?
It just seems to me that anytime somebody comes up with an idea that will work, it gets shot down. We can't ban Muslims. Why not? Sharia is sedition. More than half of Muslims in this country want it. It is sedition. What are we doing? Legalizing sedition? How serious is that?
Get off of it, you people.
One thought I had yesterday is that so many of these anti-Trump people are writers. Yeah? If they are writers, and against Trump because he says "dumb" things, then tell me why banning Muslims won't work? Unconstitutional? Bravo Sierra. There's no right to sedition. Just like there's no right to abortion, and no right to homos marrying each other. But they are the law of the land! Why don't these get shot down, but only banning Muslims won't work???? Because banning Muslims would actually help this country.
That's what I'm getting at.
Wake up.
Not to get into religion or anything. The latest topic has been politics.
I checked out Limbaugh just now, and didn't really see anything in his headlines that grabbed my attention, so I read sort of a summary of the debate. Not too different than mine.
But yesterday went by so fast, and today is going by so fast that I didn't get to expound a little on my thoughts.
I keep hearing about how Trump's ideas are "nonserious". Really? Well, let me tell you. If there's anybody in this race that is saying something serious in terms of what would work against terrorism and illegal immigration, and even against drugs, it is this guy. Who the heck has been "nonserious" all these years if it isn't the GOP? At times, these guys sound just like the Democrats. If they sound just like the Democrats, what good are they for?
It just seems to me that anytime somebody comes up with an idea that will work, it gets shot down. We can't ban Muslims. Why not? Sharia is sedition. More than half of Muslims in this country want it. It is sedition. What are we doing? Legalizing sedition? How serious is that?
Get off of it, you people.
One thought I had yesterday is that so many of these anti-Trump people are writers. Yeah? If they are writers, and against Trump because he says "dumb" things, then tell me why banning Muslims won't work? Unconstitutional? Bravo Sierra. There's no right to sedition. Just like there's no right to abortion, and no right to homos marrying each other. But they are the law of the land! Why don't these get shot down, but only banning Muslims won't work???? Because banning Muslims would actually help this country.
That's what I'm getting at.
Wake up.
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
Watched some of the GOP debate
Rather ponderous. Look, solving the terrorist problem ain't hard. Just keep them out. Block their access to anybody here at home. Shut down their communication networks. Whenever somebody tries to talk to the bad guys, they will have some explaining to do. That's what W did, but somehow, we are led to believe that this is wrong, and therefore, we can do nothing. This makes me suspicious. Maybe there are too many people who don't really want to stop this. It's not a hard problem. Like so many other problems I've covered on this blog.
But it will become a much bigger problem if we let it grow like it is.
It's the Democrats who are failing. Bush did okay with the terrorist problem. Obama has not. It is clear who does it better and it isn't the Democrats.
But it will become a much bigger problem if we let it grow like it is.
It's the Democrats who are failing. Bush did okay with the terrorist problem. Obama has not. It is clear who does it better and it isn't the Democrats.
obligatory, 12.16.15; debate and whatnot
Did not watch. Checked in with Dick Morris, who said that Rubio lost. Read an article off of Red State that claim Cruz was too tough on Rubio. He says that Cruz has a problem. He does not like Trump. Sounds to me like the conservatives have a problem. You have to play ball by the Establishment rules, or they stay home if their boy does not win.
Thus, the GOP has a problem. No matter who gets nominated, somebody is going to be unhappy about it. Christie might become the new darling of the Establishment wing, but he won't be well received by conservatives, I suspect.
Bush got bad reviews from Morris. Is it fair to say to stick a fork in him?
Trump and Cruz. One of them has to unite the party.
Other than politics, the computer problem is solve, but I am using the tablet anyway. Slowsme down a lot. Hunt and peck typing is slow.
Thus, the GOP has a problem. No matter who gets nominated, somebody is going to be unhappy about it. Christie might become the new darling of the Establishment wing, but he won't be well received by conservatives, I suspect.
Bush got bad reviews from Morris. Is it fair to say to stick a fork in him?
Trump and Cruz. One of them has to unite the party.
Other than politics, the computer problem is solve, but I am using the tablet anyway. Slowsme down a lot. Hunt and peck typing is slow.
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
Computer difficulty
I am using the tablet with wireless keyboard. Don't like it much cuz it is too dang small for my hands.
The netbook is nearly seven years old. That's only 49 dog years. Perhaps it could be 10 years per year, so that the thing is nearly 70 'computer years' old. Old enough to die.
I'd like to keep using it for awhile longer, cuz it is easier. I will miss it.
Update:
It's alive! It's alive! It's alive!!!
The netbook is nearly seven years old. That's only 49 dog years. Perhaps it could be 10 years per year, so that the thing is nearly 70 'computer years' old. Old enough to die.
I'd like to keep using it for awhile longer, cuz it is easier. I will miss it.
Update:
It's alive! It's alive! It's alive!!!
Chappaquiddick even worse than I thought
A little more detail exists than what has been reported until now, at least according to Powerline. I always suspected the worst about Kennedy, and this shows that to be justified. He tried to get somebody to take the rap for what he did himself. Not only that, they ( him and his cousin ) made a failed attempt at a rescue, and STILL didn't tell authorities, and STILL lied about it.
The key point was the resort to the dishonesty in order to protect one's political position.
Kennedy should not have been in public life after that. The lack of accountability is how we end up with guys like him. In the present, we have got Hillary Clinton, who just may become the next president. It just seems to get worse and worse. Chappaquiddick was only about one person. Benghazi was only about four people. But one of these days, the entire nation may be in the same position as those people if we keep putting people like this into positions of power.
There's no respect for truth. This is going to bite us real hard one of these days.
The key point was the resort to the dishonesty in order to protect one's political position.
Kennedy should not have been in public life after that. The lack of accountability is how we end up with guys like him. In the present, we have got Hillary Clinton, who just may become the next president. It just seems to get worse and worse. Chappaquiddick was only about one person. Benghazi was only about four people. But one of these days, the entire nation may be in the same position as those people if we keep putting people like this into positions of power.
There's no respect for truth. This is going to bite us real hard one of these days.
Monday, December 14, 2015
Guitar Lesson - Rocky Mountain High - John Denver
This dude makes it seem easy. I know that it isn't, but then again, if you're really good, it is easy. Or to put it another way, the great ones make it look easy.
Jedi Mind Trick
You really don't want to vote for Trump, now do you? When I read the headlines, it seems like that that is what they are saying. It is like Obi wan, who tells the weak minded character that he doesn't really want to do what is wants to do.
Jizya is mandated by the Quran and the Hadiths
Wikipedia
Comment:
If it is required in the Quran and the Hadiths, then it must be Sharia, right?
How do liberals explain why we should allow this in our own country? Over half of American Muslim favor sharia. How do you reconcile this???
You can't. But what you will hear is how mean and bigoted you are for not wanting to allow them to immigrate to this country. If they are going to try to implement sharia, then they don't belong here. If you think otherwise, then I think that you are not in accord with our own laws yourself.
If you are going to be against our own laws, then don't pretend to be for the rule of law. We tend to get lectures from liberals on the subject.
Comment:
If it is required in the Quran and the Hadiths, then it must be Sharia, right?
How do liberals explain why we should allow this in our own country? Over half of American Muslim favor sharia. How do you reconcile this???
You can't. But what you will hear is how mean and bigoted you are for not wanting to allow them to immigrate to this country. If they are going to try to implement sharia, then they don't belong here. If you think otherwise, then I think that you are not in accord with our own laws yourself.
If you are going to be against our own laws, then don't pretend to be for the rule of law. We tend to get lectures from liberals on the subject.
Obligatory, 12.14.15; Up and about
It's 3:00 am, and I'm not asleep. It may seem like I am bothered by something these days, but there's really nothing going on.
If there's anything unusual, then it is the switchover in my work. Going from delivery to Uber may seem to be an insignificant thing, but the work is quite different in some ways. One thing that is different is the hours, and that is why I am making the change. I feel that being on the job all day presents some problems for me. With Uber, I can pace myself a little differently, and I think that should be helpful.
But it's only an idea. The idea is now being tested. If it works, then I'll be doing that for a living for now on. If not, I may have a problem.
But it is going well enough that I don't think there's going to be a problem. So, no worries. Not yet, at least.
But why write about this? One thing about writing is that you don't get immediate feedback like you do with a conversation. You can see by a person's reaction how you are being perceived. However, with writing like this, the only perception I can get is from the audience numbers. Thus, what I write may give off quite a different impression that I intended. That's why I mention this. Who knows what people may think of me based upon a few things that I write.
Perhaps this is not the best form of self-expression. The social media may be better. I have tried that though. It doesn't really satisfy me. Well, maybe nothing really can.
People perceive you in any number of ways. There's probably not a whole lot you can do about it. Even if you are conversing with them, they may be very good at hiding what they really think or feel.
All I can do is be as straight as possible with people. I am really amazed that this is probably not appreciated. It may be even resented, for all I know. The human race is a strange beast.
If there's anything unusual, then it is the switchover in my work. Going from delivery to Uber may seem to be an insignificant thing, but the work is quite different in some ways. One thing that is different is the hours, and that is why I am making the change. I feel that being on the job all day presents some problems for me. With Uber, I can pace myself a little differently, and I think that should be helpful.
But it's only an idea. The idea is now being tested. If it works, then I'll be doing that for a living for now on. If not, I may have a problem.
But it is going well enough that I don't think there's going to be a problem. So, no worries. Not yet, at least.
But why write about this? One thing about writing is that you don't get immediate feedback like you do with a conversation. You can see by a person's reaction how you are being perceived. However, with writing like this, the only perception I can get is from the audience numbers. Thus, what I write may give off quite a different impression that I intended. That's why I mention this. Who knows what people may think of me based upon a few things that I write.
Perhaps this is not the best form of self-expression. The social media may be better. I have tried that though. It doesn't really satisfy me. Well, maybe nothing really can.
People perceive you in any number of ways. There's probably not a whole lot you can do about it. Even if you are conversing with them, they may be very good at hiding what they really think or feel.
All I can do is be as straight as possible with people. I am really amazed that this is probably not appreciated. It may be even resented, for all I know. The human race is a strange beast.
Sunday, December 13, 2015
"If you find yourself alone, in green fields, with the sun on your face...
do not be troubled, for you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
The dreams meant I was dead! But I wasn't in Elysium. Better here than the other place, though.
The dreams meant I was dead! But I wasn't in Elysium. Better here than the other place, though.
Obligatory, 12.13.15; Dreams
Seems that I wrote about my dreams before. Not dreams in terms of aspirations, but the dreams you have when you sleep.
Dreams can tell you things, but they tell me nothing cuz I usually don't remember them. Why am I remembering some of them now? Don't know.
Dreams are what's in the subconscious. It's stuff deep in the your character, or soul, if you will. When you remember them, it may be well to take note of them. It may tell you something.
As for mine, I don't know what they are telling me. But these are violent dreams. One was about a couple dogs attacking a man, then they turned away from that man and came toward me. I woke up before the poop hit the fan, so I cannot relate what happened. That dream was a few days ago. Last night, there was this dream where I was in a room, and there was a woman also in the room I was in. There was a man in the other room, and this woman began to taunt the man. I could tell that the man was getting angry, and so could the woman. But she kept on and on until she said too much. She knew that she said too much, because then she suddenly left the room before the man could enter. The thought occurred to me to leave, but I didn't. The man came in, and as I expected, decided to take issue with me about something I wasn't responsible for. A fight ensued. I was stunned by a punch, but instead of going down, I just got mad and began fighting like a demon. I was enraged to a murderous fury. Then I woke up.
What does it mean? I wonder about the waking up part. I wake up before something really bad can happen. It may be a type of defense mechanism. Seems like I am apart from violence, but that I suspect it is heading my way. I don't want it to, but trouble will come whether you want it to or not.
I have no way of determining the rest. Perhaps a shrink can do it.
Dreams can tell you things, but they tell me nothing cuz I usually don't remember them. Why am I remembering some of them now? Don't know.
Dreams are what's in the subconscious. It's stuff deep in the your character, or soul, if you will. When you remember them, it may be well to take note of them. It may tell you something.
As for mine, I don't know what they are telling me. But these are violent dreams. One was about a couple dogs attacking a man, then they turned away from that man and came toward me. I woke up before the poop hit the fan, so I cannot relate what happened. That dream was a few days ago. Last night, there was this dream where I was in a room, and there was a woman also in the room I was in. There was a man in the other room, and this woman began to taunt the man. I could tell that the man was getting angry, and so could the woman. But she kept on and on until she said too much. She knew that she said too much, because then she suddenly left the room before the man could enter. The thought occurred to me to leave, but I didn't. The man came in, and as I expected, decided to take issue with me about something I wasn't responsible for. A fight ensued. I was stunned by a punch, but instead of going down, I just got mad and began fighting like a demon. I was enraged to a murderous fury. Then I woke up.
What does it mean? I wonder about the waking up part. I wake up before something really bad can happen. It may be a type of defense mechanism. Seems like I am apart from violence, but that I suspect it is heading my way. I don't want it to, but trouble will come whether you want it to or not.
I have no way of determining the rest. Perhaps a shrink can do it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)