http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPcyTyilmYY
You oughta fucking know.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Replies too long for the Format
I have some close libertarian/atheist friends who are quite fond of Sagan - his baloney detector is supposed to be wonderful.
"The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot."
In this scenario, the rivers of blood are far tinier than the dot, and just as insignificant. He's arguing that people are important and unimportant in the same breath.
"It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience."
Yes, I think that was said thousands of years earlier by the Psalmist - Psalm 8:3-5 in my personal preference, NKJV - "3 When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers,
The moon and the stars, which You have ordained,
4 What is man that You are mindful of him,
And the son of man that You visit him?
5 For You have made him a little lower than the angels,[b]
And You have crowned him with glory and honor."
Psalm 19:1 - " 1 The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament shows His handiwork."
115:16 - "16 The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD’s;
But the earth He has given to the children of men."
Indeed gazing upon the vastness of the stars is humbling and character-building.
"Please, don’t give me the Tea Party run around, just say either YES (Tea Party should put their tail between their legs), or NO (Tea Party should not accept the deaths of protesters). It’s an easy question."
It's not so easy, as I only know that they vow to defend themselves and one another from enemies both foreign and domestic, but what should happen and what could happen and what will happen are not for me to know until they DO happen. If the government shoots first they will have started a civil war, and I am not familiar with all the rules of engagement. The government *did* commit such a slaughter on an armed population at Waco and the results were as expected - they went down fighting and they were murdered, almost to the last. The government IS armed with bigger toys, after all, and when they can stop the cameras from seeing what they do out back...such as gassing those hiding in the bunker - the women and children - to death, while punching holes in the walls to create an optimum breeze for the fire which they then start, all the while piping out the soothing strains of "This is not an attack - BAM, holepunch. Come out with your hands up - BAM. We will not attack you - BAM" after the women and children are dead...then comes the fire that rages through the building and kills *almost* all the rest except a couple eyewitnesses...if it comes to the worst they have only said they will go down fighting. By the time it goes that far, though, as you can see from the footage in Waco: Rules of Engagement (and read about in the legislative investigation papers), the people were *trying* to give up; all they wanted was press available so they wouldn't be shot on the way out the door...but it was too late; the government had no intention of allowing cameras to see their slaughter (though some caught it anyway.) One of the leaders of the blue sniper teams had shot Linda Weaver in cold blood as she held her baby not long before, and the legal stuff was being sorted out as Waco happened. Now why the hell am I being forced to relive and reimagine these violent scenarios because of Bill Ayers exactly? This is the very sh** we're trying to PREVENT with limited government. Yet if it has to come to it we are willing to fight the fight so that our children will not have to (even if it is now coming to be my children's time now - they're TPers too though.) But the Waco people had not advocated or committed any such acts as Ayers had - they kept to themselves. (Lest you tell me how bad David Koresh was, or how he was stockpiling weapons for the collective defense, he had been openly visible in town several times just prior to the attack, and could have been arrested at any time without bloodshed or wholesale murder.)
By the way, factoid - the investigation papers include a letter by Vince Foster. He was not, as some conservatives claim, murdered - he killed himself because he did not stop the Waco slaughter, which he had the power to do. The local guy/sherriff or whatever the hell he was (look it up again later) had a single name to contact in case shit went down and it needed to be stopped; that was Foster. Foster never could take the guilt of what he had done and expressed this in a letter to his wife IIRC. Hence his death. Which had Hillary and Co. tearing through his office and shredding papers before condoling his wife, I might mention. Ugly business, that.
" · 28 video tapes from the repositories show that in the final onslaught on the Waco compound were members of the US military in special assault gear and with name tags obscured. As noted above, Clinton's revocation of the Posse Comitatus Act made this presence legal. McNulty isolates Vince Foster as the White House point man for the Waco operation.
McNulty cites Foster's widow as saying that the depression that prompted the White House lawyer's death was fueled by horror at the carnage at Waco for which the White House had given the ultimate green light. Foster was writing a Waco report when he died. McNulty says that some documents about Foster and Waco were among those removed from his office after his death, later to surface in a White house store room sheltering archives of the First Lady."
Link
I'm not going to commit textwall again; this is going to the blog and linked.
"The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot."
In this scenario, the rivers of blood are far tinier than the dot, and just as insignificant. He's arguing that people are important and unimportant in the same breath.
"It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience."
Yes, I think that was said thousands of years earlier by the Psalmist - Psalm 8:3-5 in my personal preference, NKJV - "3 When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers,
The moon and the stars, which You have ordained,
4 What is man that You are mindful of him,
And the son of man that You visit him?
5 For You have made him a little lower than the angels,[b]
And You have crowned him with glory and honor."
Psalm 19:1 - " 1 The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament shows His handiwork."
115:16 - "16 The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD’s;
But the earth He has given to the children of men."
Indeed gazing upon the vastness of the stars is humbling and character-building.
"Please, don’t give me the Tea Party run around, just say either YES (Tea Party should put their tail between their legs), or NO (Tea Party should not accept the deaths of protesters). It’s an easy question."
It's not so easy, as I only know that they vow to defend themselves and one another from enemies both foreign and domestic, but what should happen and what could happen and what will happen are not for me to know until they DO happen. If the government shoots first they will have started a civil war, and I am not familiar with all the rules of engagement. The government *did* commit such a slaughter on an armed population at Waco and the results were as expected - they went down fighting and they were murdered, almost to the last. The government IS armed with bigger toys, after all, and when they can stop the cameras from seeing what they do out back...such as gassing those hiding in the bunker - the women and children - to death, while punching holes in the walls to create an optimum breeze for the fire which they then start, all the while piping out the soothing strains of "This is not an attack - BAM, holepunch. Come out with your hands up - BAM. We will not attack you - BAM" after the women and children are dead...then comes the fire that rages through the building and kills *almost* all the rest except a couple eyewitnesses...if it comes to the worst they have only said they will go down fighting. By the time it goes that far, though, as you can see from the footage in Waco: Rules of Engagement (and read about in the legislative investigation papers), the people were *trying* to give up; all they wanted was press available so they wouldn't be shot on the way out the door...but it was too late; the government had no intention of allowing cameras to see their slaughter (though some caught it anyway.) One of the leaders of the blue sniper teams had shot Linda Weaver in cold blood as she held her baby not long before, and the legal stuff was being sorted out as Waco happened. Now why the hell am I being forced to relive and reimagine these violent scenarios because of Bill Ayers exactly? This is the very sh** we're trying to PREVENT with limited government. Yet if it has to come to it we are willing to fight the fight so that our children will not have to (even if it is now coming to be my children's time now - they're TPers too though.) But the Waco people had not advocated or committed any such acts as Ayers had - they kept to themselves. (Lest you tell me how bad David Koresh was, or how he was stockpiling weapons for the collective defense, he had been openly visible in town several times just prior to the attack, and could have been arrested at any time without bloodshed or wholesale murder.)
By the way, factoid - the investigation papers include a letter by Vince Foster. He was not, as some conservatives claim, murdered - he killed himself because he did not stop the Waco slaughter, which he had the power to do. The local guy/sherriff or whatever the hell he was (look it up again later) had a single name to contact in case shit went down and it needed to be stopped; that was Foster. Foster never could take the guilt of what he had done and expressed this in a letter to his wife IIRC. Hence his death. Which had Hillary and Co. tearing through his office and shredding papers before condoling his wife, I might mention. Ugly business, that.
" · 28 video tapes from the repositories show that in the final onslaught on the Waco compound were members of the US military in special assault gear and with name tags obscured. As noted above, Clinton's revocation of the Posse Comitatus Act made this presence legal. McNulty isolates Vince Foster as the White House point man for the Waco operation.
McNulty cites Foster's widow as saying that the depression that prompted the White House lawyer's death was fueled by horror at the carnage at Waco for which the White House had given the ultimate green light. Foster was writing a Waco report when he died. McNulty says that some documents about Foster and Waco were among those removed from his office after his death, later to surface in a White house store room sheltering archives of the First Lady."
Link
I'm not going to commit textwall again; this is going to the blog and linked.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Henny Penny - with a Twist
A little red hen once found a grain of wheat whilst scratching industriously in the barnyard.
"Oh! A treasure!" she cried. "Who will help me plant this grain of wheat?" she asked.
"Not I," said the dog, happily scratching himself behind the ear.
"Not I," purred the cat, stretching luxuriously in the sun.
"Not I," grunted the pig, lazing in his mud hole.
"Not I," said the turkey. "What a silly idea! Why don't you just, like, eat it?"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny planted the grain of wheat. Very soon the wheat began to grow and the green leaves came out of the ground. The sun shone and the rain fell and the wheat kept growing until it was tall, strong, and ripe.
"Who will help me reap this wheat?" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog, and began to follow a butterfly across the barnyard to see where it would go.
"Not I," said the cat. "I would soil my fur! Working in the dirt!"
"Not I," said the pig. "Much too hot for such endeavors!"
"Not I," said the turkey. "It looks so pretty where it is. Why mess with it?"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny reaped the wheat in the hot sun.
"Who will help me thresh this wheat" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog, as he wandered off into the woods.
"Not I," said the cat. "The chaff would make my eyes itch!"
"Not I," said the pig. "I'm late for my nap."
"Not I," said the turkey. "What is threshing?"
"To thresh is to beat the stalks until the seeds come out," Henny Penny explained.
"What a waste of time, when you could just peck them out! As if!" said the turkey. "Not I!"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!"
And Henny Penny threshed the wheat, all by herself.
"Who will help me take this wheat to the mill to have it ground?" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog, distracted by his tail, which he began to chase.
"Not I," said the cat. "It is beneath my dignity to fetch and carry!"
"Not I," said the pig. "It's much too far to the mill."
"Not I," said the turkey, and stared up at the sky. No one knew why.
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny took the wheat to the mill, and by and by she came back with the flour.
"Who will help me bake this flour into bread?" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog. "The Man is heading for the creek with his fishing pole.
See ya!"
"Not I," said the cat. "The flour dust... no, no, no!" She wrinkled her nose and began to groom herself, just at the thought of it.
"Not I," said the pig. "It's almost lunch time."
"Not I," said the turkey. "Flowers should be left in the garden, not put in the oven! Duh!"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny baked the flour and made a lovely, golden loaf of bread. The scent of the bread wafted out over the barnyard, and all of the animals began to drift toward her window.
"Who will help me eat this bread?" asked Henny Penny asked her chicks, who had gathered 'round.
"I will!" said the dog, standing on his legs to peek in through the kitchen window.
"I will!" said the cat, leaping upon the window sill.
"I will!" said the pig, standing beneath the window with his mouth watering.
"I will!" said the turkey, leaping onto the pig's back for a better look at the loaf.
"No... I will," said Henny Penny, "I and my chicks."
"By myself I planted the wheat. By myself I reaped it. By myself I threshed the wheat and carried it to the mill.
By myself I baked the bread. Now I, and mine, will eat it."
Cluck! cluck! cluck!"
"Capitalist pig!" cried the cat. ("No need to be insulting," grunted the pig.)
"Imperialist!" cried the dog.
"UNFAIR!" screamed the turkey.
"Speciesist supremacist!" shouted the pig.
Henny Penny stood dumbfounded when suddenly a huge wolf with a federal badge and a gun showed up in the barnyard and started telling her how it was going to be.
"Comrade Penny, I am confiscating 3/4 of this loaf in the name of the commonwealth and distributing it to your hungry neighbors - to wit the cat, the dog, the pig, and the turkey. The other 1/4 we'll need to support our redistributors - these guns and badges don't pay for themselves you know. Now if you resist we shall have to put you in the gulag and those guards have to eat too, you know. But I'm sure you're a good citizen and don't begrudge your neighbors the good life you are enjoying, so that surely won't be necessary. Naturally we will leave you a grain of wheat so that you can plant, reap, thresh, mill and bake it again in order to stimulate the local economy and create job growth. If you apply down at the county office there shouldn't be any problem getting an allotment of one grain for each of your chicks - that's all they really *need* after all, so don't worry about that - I'm surprised you hadn't looked into that benefit sooner! Now have a good day, comrade, and thanks for the bread."
Henny Penny sat there staring at the warm spot where the bread had been, looked at the satisfied cat, the smirking dog, the pig in his poke and the turkey, then down at her grain of wheat. She began to see herself and many other industrious hens each taking their grains of wheat and pouring them into the harbor at midnight...
Thursday, June 18, 2009
PK Post
I honestly don't know what to say to someone who believes that free market economics (millions, billions of people trading individually and voluntarily, which is the only type of economy that is consistent with individual liberty or the constitution) "doesn't work" when it is what made this the richest nation on the face of the earth. I really don't.
And the assertion that those who promote a free market want to install a wealthy ruling class is so wrong, that the angle 180 degrees doesn't even cover how wrong it is. I wouldn't know where to begin; it requires a reading of the constitution and a study of the basics of economic law from square one. I could only recommend a reading list - there are two books that can be read in the course of an afternoon that lay out enough basics to get one's feet wet, and they are put out by Bluestocking Press, written by Richard Maybury called "Whatever Happened to Penny Candy" and "Whatever Happened to Justice" respectively. They lay out the basics of liberty, economics and law. I've used them with ages from 12 and up; very reader-friendly. The wonderful thing about studying economics (tempered with common law of course - do all you have agreed to do and do not encroach upon others or their property) is that #1 it is not difficult like most people think - the fundamentals do not change #2 it is endlessly fascinating and #3 it *explains so much more than you would have ever believed possible.*
Now if you can point me to a school of economics that is fully consistent with individual liberty and the constitution, that does not direct men in which manner they must dispose of their capitol and the fruits of their labor, then please do so. Actually that's rhetorical; by definition anything but a free market in which people trade freely with one another under no compulsion except having to keep their contracts/warranties and not being permitted to encroach upon other persons and their property (i.e. protecting people by law from fraud and theft) can not be consistent with full individual liberty. If liberty is meaningless to you, well it sure as hell isn't to me. It means more than wealth, than government goodies, than my life.
In the meantime I'm linking you to an essay demonstrating exactly HOW and WHY free market economics "works" and is the only feasible option. Don't worry, it's a whimsical and entertaining little read. After that you can dig into some meat with the books I recommend or at the Foundation for Economic Education, or at the von Mises Institute. There is plenty there, including the entire text of Mises' seminal work, "Liberalism." (He defined liberal - though it's not what most people think of today. Had his work been translated sooner, we might have staved off the great depression - if we'd return to a free market now we can stop the depression that we are heading into as we speak...as it stands, that's not going to happen and we are going to be in a for-real depression; you all ain't seen nothin' yet. The Carter depression is gonna look like a picnic, even the gas lines.)
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." Alexander Tytler, 18th century.
I, Pencil Link http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html
And the assertion that those who promote a free market want to install a wealthy ruling class is so wrong, that the angle 180 degrees doesn't even cover how wrong it is. I wouldn't know where to begin; it requires a reading of the constitution and a study of the basics of economic law from square one. I could only recommend a reading list - there are two books that can be read in the course of an afternoon that lay out enough basics to get one's feet wet, and they are put out by Bluestocking Press, written by Richard Maybury called "Whatever Happened to Penny Candy" and "Whatever Happened to Justice" respectively. They lay out the basics of liberty, economics and law. I've used them with ages from 12 and up; very reader-friendly. The wonderful thing about studying economics (tempered with common law of course - do all you have agreed to do and do not encroach upon others or their property) is that #1 it is not difficult like most people think - the fundamentals do not change #2 it is endlessly fascinating and #3 it *explains so much more than you would have ever believed possible.*
Now if you can point me to a school of economics that is fully consistent with individual liberty and the constitution, that does not direct men in which manner they must dispose of their capitol and the fruits of their labor, then please do so. Actually that's rhetorical; by definition anything but a free market in which people trade freely with one another under no compulsion except having to keep their contracts/warranties and not being permitted to encroach upon other persons and their property (i.e. protecting people by law from fraud and theft) can not be consistent with full individual liberty. If liberty is meaningless to you, well it sure as hell isn't to me. It means more than wealth, than government goodies, than my life.
In the meantime I'm linking you to an essay demonstrating exactly HOW and WHY free market economics "works" and is the only feasible option. Don't worry, it's a whimsical and entertaining little read. After that you can dig into some meat with the books I recommend or at the Foundation for Economic Education, or at the von Mises Institute. There is plenty there, including the entire text of Mises' seminal work, "Liberalism." (He defined liberal - though it's not what most people think of today. Had his work been translated sooner, we might have staved off the great depression - if we'd return to a free market now we can stop the depression that we are heading into as we speak...as it stands, that's not going to happen and we are going to be in a for-real depression; you all ain't seen nothin' yet. The Carter depression is gonna look like a picnic, even the gas lines.)
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." Alexander Tytler, 18th century.
I, Pencil Link http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html
Friday, April 24, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
