A Philosopher's Blog

Democrats at Work III

Posted in Politics by Michael LaBossiere on February 11, 2014

As a public service, here is Democrats at Work Part III.

Sponsored by: Communists for Mandatory Marijuana Usage.

Tagged with:

231 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. WTP said, on February 11, 2014 at 4:10 pm

    You want answers, I gave you answers!
    I want the TRUTH!

    Some lawmakers, though, have claimed that the mere threat of the employer mandate is causing companies to shed full-time workers in the hope of keeping their staff size below 50 and avoiding the requirement.

    Administration officials dispute that this is happening on any large scale. Further, Treasury officials said Monday that businesses will be told to “certify” that they are not shedding full-time workers simply to avoid the mandate. Officials said employers will be told to sign a “self-attestation” on their tax forms affirming this, under penalty of perjury.


    ….oh, yeah, and FIRST.

    • T. J. Babson said, on February 11, 2014 at 5:21 pm

      Those giving wrong answers will be audited by the IRS. Whoever persists in his ignorance will be sent to Nurse Ratched for his next prostate exam.

  2. WTP said, on February 11, 2014 at 6:02 pm

    From Slate, no less:

    Filibuster reform has taken away the tool Republicans used to hold up President Obama’s nomines for non-lifetime posts. The party has adapted to this reality with a tactic much appreciated by journalists: public shaming. Today’s example is the confirmation hearing of Noah Bryson Mamet, who’s up for ambassador to Argentina and who bundled at least $500,000 for the Obama campaign, according to the Center for Public Integrity. He has not, as Marco Rubio found during questioning, been to Argentina.


    Perhaps he’s planning to stay at a Holiday Inn Express while he’s there?

  3. T. J. Babson said, on February 11, 2014 at 11:44 pm

    What, we are at war? Who knew?

    Our government’s incessant tightening of already restrictive ROE (Rules of Engagement), compounded by the failed COIN (Counterinsurgency) strategy—also known as “winning hearts and minds”—has made an otherwise primitive enemy formidable.

    Our best and brightest come home in body bags as politicians and lawyers dine over white linen tablecloths; writing, modifying, and re-modifying these lethal rules. Rules that favor the enemy rather than the American soldier. Rules so absurd they’re difficult to believe until you hear the same stories over and again from those returning from battle.

    In a delicate discussion with an Army Ranger who recently left the military, we heard the following: “I had to get out. I have a family who needs me. I didn’t join to be sacrificed. I joined to fight.”

    This decision came shortly after he lost a close friend to the ROE. He explained how the Taliban had attempted an ambush on his friend’s squad but quickly realized they were in a battle they couldn’t win and began retreating. While chasing them, the U.S. soldiers were ordered not to engage due to the slight chance the Taliban had laid down their arms as they ran through some type of shack. While arguing with leadership at the JOC (Joint Operations Center), his friend was shot and killed.


    • magus71 said, on February 12, 2014 at 6:46 am

      “I had to get out. I have a family who needs me. I didn’t join to be sacrificed. I joined to fight”

      Pretty much the way I feel. Through two deployments I saw this stuff happening.

      COIN killed us. We still haven’t fully recovered from the damage done, though some leaders are coming around. COIN was progressive thinking creeping into the military. And if I hear one more speech by General Dempsey to Congress about race and gender, I’ll go mad.

      For instance, this story would never have occurred in any other American war.


      In the long run we’ll pay. For now there’s just a few thousand American soldiers dead. But who cares when “tragic heroes” like Phillip Seymour Hoffman are dying, too?

      • magus71 said, on February 12, 2014 at 6:49 am

        Stories like this make me so angry, that if I were not under contract, I’d quit as soon as I found a decent job.

  4. T. J. Babson said, on February 12, 2014 at 9:37 am

    Could we be reading a similar story about climate change research in 20 years?

    The tale begins in the Sixties. That decade, nutritionists in university laboratories all over America and Western Europe were scrabbling to work out the reasons for an alarming rise in heart disease levels. By 1970, there were 520 deaths per 100,000 per year in England and Wales caused by coronary heart disease and 700 per 100,000 in America. After a while, a consensus emerged: the culprit was the high level of fat in our diets.

    One scientist in particular grabbed the headlines: a nutritionist from the University of Minnesota called Ancel Keys. Keys, famous for inventing the K-ration – 12,000 calories packed in a little box for use by troops during the Second World War – declared fat to be public enemy number one and recommended that anyone who was worried about heart disease should switch to a low-fat ”Mediterranean” diet.

    Instead of treating the findings as a threat, the food industry spied an opportunity. Market research showed there was a great deal of public enthusiasm for ”healthy” products and low-fat foods would prove incredibly popular. By the start of the Seventies, supermarket shelves were awash with low-fat yogurts, spreads, and even desserts and biscuits.

    But, amid this new craze, one voice stood out in opposition. John Yudkin, founder of the nutrition department at the University of London’s Queen Elizabeth College, had been doing his own experiments and, instead of laying the blame at the door of fat, he claimed there was a much clearer correlation between the rise in heart disease and a rise in the consumption of sugar. Rodents, chickens, rabbits, pigs and students fed sugar and carbohydrates, he said, invariably showed raised blood levels of triglycerides (a technical term for fat), which was then, as now, considered a risk factor for heart disease. Sugar also raised insulin levels, linking it directly to type 2 diabetes.

    When he outlined these results in Pure, White and Deadly, in 1972, he questioned whether there was any causal link at all between fat and heart disease. After all, he said, we had been eating substances like butter for centuries, while sugar, had, up until the 1850s, been something of a rare treat for most people. ”If only a small fraction of what we know about the effects of sugar were to be revealed in relation to any other material used as a food additive,” he wrote, ”that material would promptly be banned.”

    This was not what the food industry wanted to hear. When devising their low-fat products, manufacturers had needed a fat substitute to stop the food tasting like cardboard, and they had plumped for sugar. The new ”healthy” foods were low-fat but had sugar by the spoonful and Yudkin’s findings threatened to disrupt a very profitable business.

    As a result, says Lustig, there was a concerted campaign by the food industry and several scientists to discredit Yudkin’s work. The most vocal critic was Ancel Keys.

    Keys loathed Yudkin and, even before Pure, White and Deadly appeared, he published an article, describing Yudkin’s evidence as ”flimsy indeed”.

    ”Yudkin always maintained his equanimity, but Keys was a real a——-, who stooped to name-calling and character assassination,” says Lustig, speaking from New York, where he’s just recorded yet another television interview.

    The British Sugar Bureau put out a press release dismissing Yudkin’s claims as ”emotional assertions” and the World Sugar Research Organisation described his book as ”science fiction”. When Yudkin sued, it printed a mealy-mouthed retraction, concluding: ”Professor Yudkin recognises that we do not agree with [his] views and accepts that we are entitled to express our disagreement.”

    Yudkin was ”uninvited” to international conferences. Others he organised were cancelled at the last minute, after pressure from sponsors, including, on one occasion, Coca-Cola. When he did contribute, papers he gave attacking sugar were omitted from publications. The British Nutrition Foundation, one of whose sponsors was Tate & Lyle, never invited anyone from Yudkin’s internationally acclaimed department to sit on its committees. Even Queen Elizabeth College reneged on a promise to allow the professor to use its research facilities when he retired in 1970 (to write Pure, White and Deadly). Only after a letter from Yudkin’s solicitor was he offered a small room in a separate building.

    ”Can you wonder that one sometimes becomes quite despondent about whether it is worthwhile trying to do scientific research in matters of health?” he wrote. ”The results may be of great importance in helping people to avoid disease, but you then find they are being misled by propaganda designed to support commercial interests in a way you thought only existed in bad B films.”

    And this ”propaganda” didn’t just affect Yudkin. By the end of the Seventies, he had been so discredited that few scientists dared publish anything negative about sugar for fear of being similarly attacked. As a result, the low-fat industry, with its products laden with sugar, boomed.


  5. T. J. Babson said, on February 14, 2014 at 8:53 am

    Thumbs up or thumbs down?

    • magus71 said, on February 14, 2014 at 9:03 am

      Thumbs way up. Occupy Wallstreet can shove it up their arse.

  6. T. J. Babson said, on February 14, 2014 at 12:24 pm

    Mike, what say you?

    Don’t Beat Up on the Faculty

    The essays that appear on this site are often critical of academic faculty. The criticism is frequently legitimate, as faculty are oftentimes complicit in the formulation and execution of academic policies that should garner disapproval. Alas, faculty are too often found at the forefront of efforts to: install speech constraints on the campus community; impose admission quotas based on race, gender, ethnic origin and other illegitimate grounds; and enforce a deadening group think in academic discussion that brooks no support of free market capitalism, American Exceptionalism, faith-based life or – heaven forbid – doubts about global warming. Essays in this journal bemoan the decay of American universities from bastions of individual thought devoted to the pursuit of knowledge, truth and beauty into heavily regulated job mills that are rife with propaganda and largely in the business of brainwashing its students in favor of the progressive movement’s agenda.

    All true! But even so, it is still the case that the academic profession – much like the medical profession – has been subject to powerful forces that have rendered life much less rewarding for those who pursue the profession. The forces that have smacked doctors – who, until a generation or so ago, were amongst the most admired and rewarded communities in the country – are well-known. It is my purpose here to outline the lesser known assault – namely, the developments that have rendered the academic profession less pleasant and rougher to navigate than it was when I entered it more than four decades ago.

    Here are a dozen manifestations.

    Overregulation. The faculty is subject to scrutiny, evaluation and regulation far beyond what was common fifty years ago. From the requirement to complete faculty assessment reports to the need to adhere to behavioral codes (e.g., regarding tobacco, sexual conduct, “bullying,” and the like); from the need to comply with stringent lab and research protocols to the command that we offer remedial opportunities to “disadvantaged” students; from the demands to structure our course presentations in the most student-accessible formats to the obligation to conform to standards set by campus advisory boards (for research, teaching, even administration); from semester to semester, faculty are increasingly constrained by an ever-growing epidemic of central campus regulations that make the professorial profession more onerous, less independent and more administrative than academic.

    Shared governance. At the same time, university administrators promote the fiction of shared responsibility in running the campus. This leads to committee assignments, studies and reports, and an enormous waste of faculty time, which does not mask the fact that the campus agenda is still largely set by central administrators, not the faculty.

    Publish or perish. For faculty at private or public research institutions, and even for those employed at primarily teaching colleges, the pressure to publish – in the best journals, of course – grows in intensity every year. Faculty want to do so, naturally, but having to do so with a gun to one’s head doesn’t foster the creative juices.

    Student evaluations. This practice is now ubiquitous. At best, the results are useless; at worst, false and destructive; and most often – just misleading. Another joy of the modern professoriate.

    Student quality. Now that the nation has seemingly decided in favor of universal higher education, it is not surprising that the quality of the student body is suspect. When the student body was thinner, the quality was better.

    Salary. Academic salaries have evolved somewhat as in the entertainment industry. The top profs do fantastically well. Those who bring up the middle or rear – not so much. By the way, academics – like doctors – have a long pre-professional apprenticeship (4-5 years of graduate school followed by multiple postdocs) before they can earn a serious salary. The pre-professional period has been lengthening in recent years.

    Infrastructure. We teach on enormous campuses with ancient buildings that manifest decaying infrastructure. It’s not sexy to replace a dying heating system. The campus would rather spend money on a fancy new rec center or a luxurious dorm complex. Writing on a broken chalk board in a freezing, huge lecture hall with student sight lines impeded by crumbling support pillars is not what I would call excellent work conditions.

    Staff. In the old days, faculty could rely on staff to help prepare academic research papers and exams, schedule meetings and take care of academic record keeping. Not anymore. Everything is computerized, so faculty are expected to discharge all these responsibilities by themselves. OK, we do it – but it takes time away from our more important duties, and it’s not exactly great fun.

    Grants. It’s hard to have a successful academic career unless it is supported by one or more granting agencies. Obtaining grants is time-consuming, unpredictable, highly competitive and rather tedious. Without grants, the graduate program collapses, leaving us without teaching assistants, rendering our jobs infinitely more difficult. The pressure increases annually.

    Jobs. The academic job market has been in a funk since a decade after Sputnik. It shows no sign of improving. Faculty are often desperate to get a job and they can wind up in less desirable positions at places in the nation (or even the world) that were not in the game plan.

    Public support. Gone are the days when being a professor was a mark of distinction that garnered great support from the public. Today we are often held in contempt. Of course, considering the way we have been messing up their children, the public’s disapproval is not so surprising.

    Tolerance. Last, but far from least, those faculty who – like me – have a conservative bent find themselves working in a poisonous atmosphere in which we are viewed as at best slightly strange folk who can safely be ignored, and at worst, dangerous counterrevolutionaries who must be silenced or expelled. It is awful. (I have written about this at some length in Swimming Upstream: The Life of a Conservative Professor in Academia.)

    Don’t mistake me: these changes for the worse don’t compare with the degrading of coal mine jobs in Kentucky; low tech jobs that have been obliterated by the Internet; or other professions that have been swept away by “creative destruction.” But the changes I outlined do represent steps in the wrong direction. And they may portend much greater change as many believe that higher education is America’s next bubble.

    When I received my PhD, I had a non-academic job offer from an outfit at which I worked in the summers during graduate school. It was potentially quite lucrative. But I yearned for the academic life. I wanted the freedom to choose my own lines of professional inquiry; to be independent; to have the opportunity to interact with the best minds (around the globe) in my field; to do something worthwhile – whether it led to a marketable product or not. Were I faced with the same choice today, I’m not sure that I would make the same decision.
    – See more at: http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2014/02/dont_beat_up_on_the_faculty_1.html#sthash.b9fRSkMi.dpuf

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on February 14, 2014 at 2:13 pm

      I agree with much of what the author claims. I haven’t seen the intolerance of conservatives at my university and do not know how widespread it is. However, academics has its share of intolerant jerks who reject people just because they are different in some way they find offensive. I do recall getting the “judgmental stare” from folks when talking about hunting, fishing, shooting and solving problems by blowing up stuff.

      • WTP said, on February 14, 2014 at 2:21 pm

        academics has its share of intolerant jerks who reject people just because they are different in some way they find offensive.

        Hellooooo in there.

  7. T. J. Babson said, on February 15, 2014 at 5:56 pm

    What say you, Magus? Do we not live in a police state?

    As a result of my efforts to help injured bicyclists by calling 911, I was, in short order: separated from my friend, violently tackled, arrested, taken to county jail, stripped and left in a solitary cell.

    View story at Medium.com

  8. T. J. Babson said, on February 15, 2014 at 5:57 pm

    Magus, WTP…comments?

    • WTP said, on February 15, 2014 at 7:26 pm

      Cops f’d up bad, based on what is shown here. They do that sometimes, you know. Sometimes cops f up and it’s the cop who ends up dead. Plenty of questions here about warrents, how they are executed, what is reasonable to expect cops AND citizens to know. It’s very much like a combat situation, once the sh*t starts going down. Was enough work done up front to possibly avoid this situation?

      So you ask our thoughts, there are mine. Yours?

      • T. J. Babson said, on February 15, 2014 at 8:27 pm

        Even if there was a meth lab there, it doesn’t justify a paramilitary operation. No one should be dying in drug raids.

        • WTP said, on February 15, 2014 at 9:22 pm

          You do realize cops feel the same way? As for the 80 YO man, I suspect the cops were there for the nephew or whatevs in the other trailer. Essentially it’s the stupid drug war that is the problem here. Either way, Ruby Ridge was far worse. And all over a stupid weapons charge that never should have been a law to begin with. Not to mention the entrapment involved. But cops gotta enforce the laws we give them. Why do we have so many people in this country who can’t think for themselves? Who don’t understand where our rights truly come from? And by that I mean something more powerful and enduring and predates even a piece of paper written in 1789.

      • T. J. Babson said, on February 15, 2014 at 8:30 pm

        It goes way beyond a simple screw up because sending a SWAT team in after an 80 year old man was bound to end badly.

    • Anonymous said, on February 16, 2014 at 8:45 am

      What can I say? It’s bad. PDs need to evaluate closely how they use SWAT. We had a SWAT team that never killed anyone. I worked with two cops that had killed people. One officer killed a man who had a pistol that shot up the inside of his apartment, high on meth, said he was going to kill a cop, walked out the door with his pistol towards officer who were hiding behind some bushes. The shift SGT shot the man with his pistol and he died. Another occasion , two cops pull up to a call in front of an apartment, a guy steps out the front door unloads several rounds of .44 magnum at the cruiser, creasing the rood with several shots. Cop shoots the man with 00 Buckshot, one pellet pierces his left ventricle and he dies. Had another event where a guy had a woman hostage with a gun to her head. Cop takes a shot and misses. The bad guy got scared and dropped his gun.

      Ever hear of Charles Askins? He was a WWII vet and legendary LE officer. Why was he legendary? He killed something like 27 people as a Border Patrol Agent. Can you imagine that now? Can you imagine anyone patting a cop on the back after shooting a bad guy? Askins says he loved shooting bad guys. But now soldiers and cops are supposed to go through years of therapy and write existential meanderings after killing someone.

      LE is simply not more violent than it used to be, IMO. Remember, TJ, libs HATE cops. they love the “big picture” of a PD, but they always hate the actual application of LE which is very dirty at times. I’ve had people scream at me while I’m wrestling a dude to the ground trying to put cuffs on his? Why? they have no idea how hard it is to put cuffs on a guy that doesnt want them on. Most American lives are very neat and clean.

      Drug cases can actually be more difficult, because there’s evidence to be concerned with. In other cases, the city can shut off the power, surround the house, and talk the guy out.

      TJ, you should listen to some of the old interviews with former LAPD Chief Daryl Gates. He of course was one of the first people to utilize a paramilitary approach to law enforcement. He said things you could never get away with now. Cops used to be MUCH more brutal then they are now. They still shouldn’t kill innocent people, but I’ll have to take Mike’s argument here: How many felony warrants were pulled off this month in the US where no one died? Moreover, can you think of one incident in which a cop died or was seriously injured? Probably not, because Drudge Report doesn’t report these to the world.

      In what is still my favorite police book of all time, Night Dogs by Kent Anderson ( former special forces sgt in Vietnam, Portland Oregon cop in the 70s, and now writing teacher), he opens the book by saying:

      “I am proud to have been a member of the Portland Police Bureau, and I have been as honest as I know how in writing this book. Some readers may find it disturbing or “offensive”. The truth sometimes affects people that way.

      Things are much worse now then they were in 1975 [the year in which the book is set].”

      America is going to become, and in some cases already has, like parts of Europe and South America, in which entire swaths of cities and states are essentially unpatrolled by police, because they are essentially Indian territory. The rich will live in gated communities patrolled by armed private security. Drug Lords, pimps, armed robbers and the such will essentially rule the other domains. This has happened in France in the areas where Muslims have become uneducated wards of the state. Brazil has always been considered a country of the future, and I believe the futurists are right in at least one aspect as far as Brazil is concerned. The Brazilian SWAT teams have had to clear almost the entire city of Rio in preparation for the 2016 Olympics. House to house, just like in Iraq.

      These dystopian areas are coming to American cities, and it’s not just because American LE is too aggressive.


  9. WTP said, on February 15, 2014 at 9:40 pm

    Watching the post game discussion of the US vs Russia Olympic hockey game. Glanced away for a second and then I hear Merideth Viera bring up Hillary Clinton’s name. WTF the segue could have been I have no idea.

    • Anonymous said, on February 16, 2014 at 8:54 am

      The media is already pushing hard for her presidential run. Not sure why, but my connection won’t let me sign in.

    • T. J. Babson said, on February 16, 2014 at 10:30 am

      Hillary is not untouchable in the same way Obama is. Whoever her opponent turns out to be should be able to land some punches.

      • wtp said, on February 16, 2014 at 8:46 pm

        The media is in the bag for this bag. You think they’re not gonna whine and scream about the mean ole mean ole women hating war on women binders full of women rethuglicans beating up on a woman? The Pantsuit will hide behind the skirts of the skirts. Do you even remotely believe that anyone the media considers a threat to the left could get away with the line “what difference does it make how they died”? The Mikeomasses will fall in line, the occutards as well. The only thing she won’t have tied up is the guaranteed black turn out. The < 47% who pay for this government are not enough. The best hope is that the media and the academics get exposed for the liars and sophists that they are. I do what I can, but good luck with that.

  10. T. J. Babson said, on February 16, 2014 at 9:56 am

    Latest indication that we live in a police state: the NSA is listening in on privileged conversations between lawyers and their clients.

    As WTP mentioned: “We are trying to decide if he killed himself or died trying to escape.”

    The list of those caught up in the global surveillance net cast by the National Security Agency and its overseas partners, from social media users to foreign heads of state, now includes another entry: American lawyers.

    A top-secret document, obtained by the former N.S.A. contractor Edward J. Snowden, shows that an American law firm was monitored while representing a foreign government in trade disputes with the United States. The disclosure offers a rare glimpse of a specific instance in which Americans were ensnared by the eavesdroppers, and is of particular interest because lawyers in the United States with clients overseas have expressed growing concern that their confidential communications could be compromised by such surveillance.


    • magus71 said, on February 16, 2014 at 2:44 pm

      The article says that the Australian signals service notified the NSA that Australia was monitoring the conversations, not the NSA.

      Moreover, the article explicitly states: ‘the disclosure offers a rare glimpse of a specific instance”

      From reporting it would seem that there are specific instances every day, not rarely. But where are the specifics? The other things revealed by Snowden (social media and foreign heads of states) is well known.

      So this specific instance shows Australia spying on American lawyers.

  11. magus71 said, on February 17, 2014 at 2:31 pm


    What do you think of this story? I remember similar tests on TV, I think it was 20/20. They tested the cops with wallets and not a penny was ever missing. This was pretty much my experience at my PD.

    How honest is the typical police officer when tempted? PrimeTime’s bait: a lost wallet full of money, and hidden cameras to capture what happens next.

    Over a six-week period, ABCNEWS’ chief investigative correspondent Brian Ross and his team turned in 40 wallets or purses to 40 police officers chosen at random in Los Angeles and New York City. Varying amounts of cash were put in each, as well as numerous pieces of identification, with names, addresses and phone numbers.

    The test: Would the officers do the right thing and track down the proper owners?

    Thirty Years Later

    Ross’ investigative team copied a technique many police departments around the country routinely use to test the honesty and integrity of their officers. In fact, Ross used this technique back in the 1970s as a local reporter in Miami, when confidence in public officials at all levels was at an all-time low.

    The results of that wallet test did little to boost public confidence: 10 of the 31 wallets given to officers in the Miami area were never recovered, and two of them were turned in but the cash was missing. A number of the officers were fired or took early retirement after that report.

    Almost 30 years later, police honesty and integrity are again being called into question, most recently in Los Angeles, where the police department is trying to recover from a serious corruption scandal in its Rampart Division.

    Skeptic Citizens, Optimistic Commissioners

    Many people on the streets of LA expressed extreme skepticism about whether LAPD officers would return a lost wallet to its rightful owner.

    “To be honest, I think most of them would keep them,” said one Los Angelino.

    New Yorkers, too, were doubtful. “I’d say a majority would keep the wallets,” said one New York passerby.

    But neither Los Angeles Police Chief Bernard Parks or New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik were bothered by the PrimeTime investigation.

    “There is never an excuse or any rationale for a person keeping it as their personal property,” he says. “Officers are put in that temptation every day and our expectation is for them to have 100 percent compliance with the rules.”

    Kerik said he welcomed the test and was prepared to prosecute any officer who kept a wallet. Police were not given any advance notice as PrimeTime staff members turned in the wallets.

    The Results

    Of the 20 Los Angeles police officers who were given wallets and purses, every single one turned in the wallet and the money. Not a penny was missing from the wallets, which were given to officers of all races, throughout the city.

    “Police officers have only one legacy and that’s their integrity, their honesty,” says Parks. “Their word means a lot … and people believe in that badge and what it represents.”

    But Parks was upset to learn that in three instances, Los Angles police officers refused to take the wallets in the first place, saying it was inconvenient for them.

    “Part of the job is to service the public,” he says. “That property could be part of a crime, it could be somebody’s valuables. It’s our expectation that they would take it.”

    And for all that has been written and said about the shortcomings of the NYPD, New York’s police officers passed the integrity test with flying colors.

    “The reality is that all 20 [wallets] came back,” says Kerik. “It basically shows that our integrity standards are very high and the cops are doing their job. And it’s something we’re very proud of.”


    • T.J.B. said, on February 17, 2014 at 11:46 pm

      I’m not surprised. All the cops I have known have been decent people.

      Cops take orders from higher ups and are just doing a job. Politicians and DAs are much more culpable for turning our country into a police state.

      • wtp said, on February 18, 2014 at 9:31 am

        Nor am I. What this really speaks to is the perceptions the general population has about the integrity of police. Where do people get these messed up expectations? FWICT, cynicism is much more socially acceptable than naivety, yet both are by definition improper perceptions of reality. Perhaps because the costs of naivety are readily apparent, but the costs of cynicism are mostly opportunity costs which by nature are never realized. An interesting philosophical subject itself, but nowhere near as interesting as sex with robots nor does it get the juices flowing like slamming the evil rich.

  12. magus71 said, on February 18, 2014 at 7:13 am

    Our future: kangaroo courts and technocratic terms of non-sense. Welcome to the dystopia. See you all in the re-education camps. You should have been at the Army’s new sexual assault training I went to last week. So hip, so cool. Curse words every sentence for two hours by the instructors to show how down with the times they are. I won’t even list the words, but lets just say their intentional public use made even an old salt like me uncomfortable. A general officer somewhere signed off on that. Complete left agenda. The gay thing will fall into the same track.

    “Micro-aggression.” “equity policy”.


    • wtp said, on February 18, 2014 at 9:34 am

      Yeah, saw that. What really creeps me out is the apology which was obviously written for him by lawyers and presented to him to sign/distribute/whatevs. It’s like they took control of his soul.

      • magus71 said, on February 18, 2014 at 9:49 am

        That’s exactly what I thought (about the apology).

        Just wow.

        I fear this stuff more than the NSA. This has crept in to our military.

        • T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:38 pm

          It is not the NSA that needs to be feared so much as the temptation for people in power to use the NSA to spy on their political enemies.

          No need to have any Watergate-style break-ins if the NSA can do it for you. No fuss, no muss.

          • T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:41 pm

            I predict we will eventually find out that the NSA was heavily involved in the Petraeus takedown.

            • magus71 said, on February 19, 2014 at 5:39 pm

              Quite possibly. There are rumors…though I just remember that technology is morally neutral. Bad people should be fired and or jailed. But this country twice hired the man in charge of the NSA: Obama.

      • T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:35 pm

        But what happens when you combine the power of the NSA with this PC nonsense? You could mumble something non-PC in your sleep, the NSA monitors it, and before you know it you are “apologizing” for your dreams.

  13. wtp said, on February 18, 2014 at 9:37 am

    Also, do keep in mind this was in Canada where such nonsense is far more prevalent and such BS legislation has been on the books for quite some time.

  14. T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:08 am

    Heartbreaking. Why is Kerry talking about global warming?

    • T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:09 am

      The police in this video are not so nice.

    • wtp said, on February 19, 2014 at 10:39 am

      Well, you voted for him ;)…But seriously…in his defense, perhaps he’s concerned that all those tires burning are heating up the planet? Be prepared for lip service to be paid, though. Nothing that will make any difference. After all, remember this?

      Vladamir’s b*tches.

      • T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:28 pm

        True–I did vote for him. In my defense, I think he would have done less damage than Obama.

        • wtp said, on February 19, 2014 at 7:01 pm

          Oh, true dat. Of course if Kerry made the same moves as Obama, not that he would, he’d be toast by now. Even with the media behind him. Don’t count on that being the case for The Hildebeast.

  15. T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:17 am

    Maybe Sean Penn could provide some insight?

    • wtp said, on February 19, 2014 at 10:30 am

      But Venezuela has the best philosophers setting their economic policies. They tell the evil rich and corporations how much to charge for stuff like HD TV’s and toilet paper. Not that you can find either in the country anymore, but what you do find is at exactly the right price. LToV, you know.

      • T. J. Babson said, on February 19, 2014 at 12:44 pm

        How many times does socialism have to fail before people understand it is a bankrupt ideology?

        • wtp said, on February 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm

          But it will always be different next time. As Beck said, things are gonna change, I can feel it. What song was that in?

        • apollonian said, on February 19, 2014 at 7:14 pm

          People Are Typically Subject To Propaganda, So It Should Be Effective Prop.

          TJB: how many times does “free” will fallaciousness (non-determinism) and subjectivism have to fail before people understand it’s bankrupt?

          For note and never forget: people are SINNERS, subject to error.

          Don’t u see?–socialism is “good,” “virtuous,” and this is why it’s justified in theory, theory founded upon “free” will, as I note. When compared w. determinism, strict cause-effect, “free” will is made attractive to the masses who want to pretend they’re “good,” as they’re taught fm child-hood. Thus people are too often & easily moved by such as guilt-complex–that’s how, for example, white folks of USA have essentially given-away their land to the dark-skins, USA now mere empire, like the old Roman empire.

          Further, note w. the present corruption, fascism, corp. welfare, and oligarchy which pretends to “capitalism” and “free enterprise,” people simple-mindedly conclude the anti-dote to this fascist puke is socialism–even if it doesn’t work so well–people make use of it as anti-thesis to present tyranny, imagining anything is better than present tyranny.

          Note the masses of people are subject to whatever propaganda prevails for fashion–and socialism is one of the things that “works” for them for reasons I give, above, (a) it’s “good” for some, and (b) for others it’s counter to the fascist tyranny spouting the phony free-enterprise.

          That’s why the proper course is to note this sad fact about the volk–they are EASILY moved by prop.–that’s why it’s best to keep them, much as it’s possible, to dear Christianity, the REAL thing (promoting TRUTH above all things), which is anti-semitic, against lies. But reality is DETERMINED, and it seems impossible to completely avoiding the inevitable “Decline of the West,” by Oswald Spengler–as reality is determined, after all, and things must happen as necessary.

          And of course, even aside fm simplistic anti-semitism, if it’s then found the “Christian” establishment begins to acting like Jews themselves–as Martin Luther complained–then the people will actually welcome the Jews BACK to taking power as we actually these Jews have done since even before French Revolution, ruling now w. iron fist.

          • apollonian said, on February 19, 2014 at 7:18 pm

            very last line of above essay should read, “…as we actually SEE these Jews have done…”

  16. magus71 said, on February 19, 2014 at 6:49 pm

    Proof trying to tell us what the climate will be in 100 years is folly.


  17. wtp said, on February 20, 2014 at 7:12 pm

    Ten members of a Philadelphia ironworkers union face charges of arson and racketeering in connection with a fire against the church, which was employing non-union workers.


  18. wtp said, on February 20, 2014 at 10:05 pm

    ptrfrnch 9 days ago
    sounds like she died because she was too stupid to operate a website that was functional in november. their insurance didn’t get canceled until january 1, right when their new insurance would have kicked in. i’m glad she’s dead.


    • magus71 said, on February 21, 2014 at 7:03 am

      “So there is a clear correlation here: Cities with a lot of violent crime tend to vote Democratic, while cities with relatively low levels of violent crime tend to vote Republican.”

      Liberalism is evil. There I said it.


      • wtp said, on February 21, 2014 at 9:58 am

        B-b-b-but correlation is not causation. I’m sure its all a giant coincidence. Much like socialism and failure. Those leftist cities just aren’t doing leftism right.

        • magus71 said, on February 21, 2014 at 10:36 am

          At least this article gives me a good list of cities to retire to.

        • apollonian said, on February 21, 2014 at 2:17 pm

          WTP: note “causation” is a conclusion of INDUCTION (generalization) which is founded upon correlation. Not all correlation is sure indicator (or “proof”) of causation, but ALL causation is demonstrated by means of induction and correlation.

      • apollonian said, on February 21, 2014 at 2:24 pm

        Yes magus, ur logic is excellent–I’d only disagree w. the “evil” part of ur conclusion, merely to substitute INSANITY in its place.

        Further, I’d note “liberalism” has become gross buzz-word, it’s modern, or present-day meaning being synonym for fascism, or a particular sort of fascism. Note the original “liberalism” genuinely meant FREEDOM, freedom in accord w. human reason. Nowadays reason is denigrated, and liberalism is simply a pretext for dictatorship. Truly, the present-day “liberalism” is mere pretext for satanism, death-worship, tyranny.

  19. wtp said, on February 21, 2014 at 10:31 am

    In Sacramento, Nick Janes reports on the plight of Katherine Cadman, who eagerly signed up for an insurance policy through the state’s exchange — and then tried to use it to see a doctor. Doctors, however, are not anxious to see customers from ObamaCare plans, thanks to the lousy reimbursement rates


  20. wtp said, on February 21, 2014 at 6:41 pm

    In America…whose children are they?

    New York state Sen. Ruben Diaz Jr. introduced a bill that would require parents of elementary school children to attend a minimum of four parent support classes. If parents don’t go, 6th graders won’t move onto 7th grade.


  21. magus71 said, on February 22, 2014 at 10:31 am


    If Robert Gates’ assertion in his book, that Obama never believed in the Afghanistan mission but tripled the troop count there for political reasons, what does this mean? Does this in any way make Obama despicable?

    • apollonian said, on February 22, 2014 at 1:52 pm

      Don’t forget: Obongo is TOTAL puppet of CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), Trilateralists, and Bilderberg; he does nothing, says nothing whatsoever that isn’t scripted and carefully calculated and coached. Obongo doesn’t have to “believe” in anything–and very likely doesn’t–but regardless, does what he’s told to do. Obongo is stooge, mouth-piece, front-man, spokes-flack and nothing else.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on February 24, 2014 at 12:54 pm

      It makes him a politician. Also, to be fair to Obama, he inherited Afghanistan. As such, it makes sense that he would be against being there, but stuck with dealing with it.

      • magus71 said, on February 26, 2014 at 6:24 pm

        He was stuck with dealing with it because he ran for president while we were there.

  22. WTP said, on February 26, 2014 at 6:02 pm


    Florida Democratic congressional candidate Alex Sink said immigration reform was important at a Tuesday debate because, without it, it would be difficult for employers to find people to clean hotel rooms and do landscaping.

    “Immigration reform is important in our country,” she said. “We have a lot of employers over on the beaches that rely upon workers and especially in this high-growth environment, where are you going to get people to work to clean our hotel rooms or do our landscaping? We don’t need to put those employers in a position of hiring undocumented and illegal workers.”


  23. magus71 said, on February 27, 2014 at 6:55 am

    Anyone care to guess what would happen if the DOJ sponsored a video like this today?

    • WTP said, on February 27, 2014 at 10:38 am

      J. Edgar Hoover was a fascist. And a homo. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The homo, I mean. Unless J. Edgar Hoover did it. Then we can point fingers and laugh. You can look it up.

      • magus71 said, on February 27, 2014 at 11:29 am

        There’s some dispute about his sexuality. He had a lot of enemies, many of which tried the counter-smear campaigns. As far as his fascism, he worked for a lot of presidents whom never fired him.

  24. WTP said, on February 28, 2014 at 3:11 pm

    Foreign policy “experts” in 2008 comment on Sarah Palin’s extremely far-fetched speculation that Russians might invade Ukraine if Obambi was elected:

    Palin helpfully offered four scenarios for such a crisis, one of which was this strange one:
    “After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.”
    Watch the video here:

    As we’ve said before, this is an extremely far-fetched scenario. And given how Russia has been able to unsettle Ukraine’s pro-Western government without firing a shot, I don’t see why violence would be necessary to bring Kiev to heel. Watch the upcoming parliamentary elections in December to see if Moscow gets the pliable new government it wants.


    What this country needs is more experts and fewer dolts like Sarah Palin.

    • T. J. Babson said, on February 28, 2014 at 7:46 pm

      Proof that Obama is not a deep thinker. Just regurgitates the CW.

      • magus71 said, on February 28, 2014 at 8:04 pm

        al-Qaeda’s a threat, then it’s not a threat, then it’s a threat….Putin is waaaay out of Obama’s league when it comes to this stuff. In the intelligence world Putin is considered to have almost magical powers when it comes to reading the media, international zeitgeist, and doing things that are plausibly deniable yet effective.

        Plain and simple, Putin wants to gather the old Russian empire. And he’s very good at getting the job done with very little.

        I believe that someday in the future, Putin will be considered a leader on the level and character of Otto Von Bismarck: A cold and calculating realist.

      • T. J. Babson said, on February 28, 2014 at 11:47 pm

        Jane, you ignorant slut.

        • T. J. Babson said, on February 28, 2014 at 11:47 pm

          For you youngsters:

        • magus71 said, on March 2, 2014 at 10:21 am

          “A Politico report calls it “a crisis that no one anticipated.” The Daily Beast, reporting on Friday’s US intelligence assessment that “Vladimir Putin’s military would not invade Ukraine,” quotes a Senate aide claiming that “no one really saw this kind of thing coming.”

          Op-eds from all over the legacy press this week helped explained why. Through the rose tinted lenses of a media community deeply convinced that President Obama and his dovish team are the masters of foreign relations, nothing poor Putin did could possibly derail the stately progress of our genius president.”


          • WTP said, on March 2, 2014 at 10:33 am

            So what’s the big deal? Our genius president is so smart he doesn’t even have to go to class.

            “The President’s national security team met today to receive an update on the situation in Ukraine and discuss potential policy options. We will provide further updates later this afternoon,” reads the full statement.


            According to Time magazine’s Zeke Miller, Obama skipped the meeting. “Obama did not attend the meeting, but WH official says he has been briefed by Susan Rice and his national security team,” says Miller.

            • magus71 said, on March 2, 2014 at 11:17 am

              “Now Ukraine has emerged as a test of Obama’s argument that, far from weakening American power, he has enhanced it through smarter diplomacy, stronger alliances and a realism untainted by the ideology that guided his predecessor.

              It will be a hard argument for him to make, analysts say.

              A president who has made clear to the American public that the “tide of war is receding” has also made clear to foreign leaders, including opportunists in Russia, that he has no appetite for a new one. What is left is a vacuum once filled, at least in part, by the possibility of American force.”


            • magus71 said, on March 2, 2014 at 11:44 am

              As one commentator astutely notes:

              “Tonite on pay per view Obama community Leader of the choom gang, in a no holds barred battle to the death with KGB martial artist Vlad (the destroyer) Putin…….place your bets.”

  25. magus71 said, on March 1, 2014 at 10:47 am

    Is there a single sentence that better analyzes the current schism between Left and Right?

    “Shallow men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect.”~Ralph Waldo Emerson

  26. magus71 said, on March 2, 2014 at 11:45 am

    Did I mention that Russia beat us in the Olympics?

  27. T. J. Babson said, on March 2, 2014 at 12:28 pm

    Who remembers this one?

    • WTP said, on March 2, 2014 at 12:58 pm

      Yep. But that’s typical of war monte ring Republicans. They’re just like Jews, you know. Constantly beating the drums for war against peaceful countries like Russia (Cold War’s over donchano), China (ditto, they’re “capitalists” now, one-party crony capitalists, but pay that no nevermind), Norks, Iran, Hezbollah, Muslim Brohood, Taliban, etc. all governments who just wanna be left alone to sodomize their own people. No threat whatsoever. This Putin thing reminds me of another leader of his “folk” who were scattered among various other countries and all that guy wanted to do…a vegetarian, anti-vivisectionist, non-smoker all around good guy mind you…was bring his poor lost sheep into the fold where they would be safe. But could certain allies just leave him alone in his peaceful quest? Noooo. Evil bastards. Well in spite of Mike & friends best efforts we may repeat history again. Does that make this time tragedy or farce?

      • WTP said, on March 2, 2014 at 1:00 pm

        War mongering, obviously. Wtf is a “monte ring”? Stupid spell check.

  28. WTP said, on March 2, 2014 at 1:55 pm

    Got this at Ace of Spades, however the original source is undetermined.

    “The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their President.”

    • magus71 said, on March 2, 2014 at 1:58 pm


      If memory serves, this was an article from the Czech president or Prime Minister. And outstanding analysis.

      • magus71 said, on March 2, 2014 at 2:03 pm

        After researching it a bit, I see that there is somewhat of a conspiracy theory as to who wrote it. Still I think it’s a good piece, with a similar history and meaning to this, apparently another misquotation.

        “A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”

  29. WTP said, on March 2, 2014 at 11:55 pm

    TJ, Magus…do you find this case of police brutality as amusing as I do?

    View story at Medium.com

    • T. J. Babson said, on March 3, 2014 at 1:15 pm

      Only in a sadistic sort of way.

      • WTP said, on March 3, 2014 at 2:03 pm

        Well I would say black humor, but I’ll take sadistic but what’s so beautiful about it is that it’s sadistic on sooo many levels on a beyond-Kafka-yet-real-world kind of way. Not to mention that “income inequality”, which Mike so constipates on, is a significant factor in the heavenly world of SF leftism.

        What amused me most is his statement “This is not the worst experience of my life. It’s certainly not the most troubling thing to happen in San Francisco that evening.” One ponders how having one’s arm re-broken, put in a cell with the dregs of society, treated like an animal (worse even), being stripped naked, held in a feces (and peanut butter?) splattered room, etc. was “not the worst experience of my life”. Of course in some areas of SF, such is nothing more than a quiet evening at home.

  30. WTP said, on March 3, 2014 at 12:29 am

    Find the Koch bros on this list:

    • magus71 said, on March 3, 2014 at 5:21 am

      Well isn’t this interesting. National Education Assoc: #4; Exxon Mobil # 78. Also, no Republican leaning orgs until #17.

  31. WTP said, on March 3, 2014 at 12:42 pm

    From Thomas Sowell, as excerpted via David Thompson:

    The front page of a local newspaper in northern California featured the headline “The Promise Denied,” lamenting the under-representation of women in computer engineering. The continuation of this long article on an inside page had the headline, “Who is to blame for this?”

    In other words, the fact that reality does not match the preconceptions of the intelligentsia shows that there is something wrong with reality, for which somebody must be blamed. Apparently their preconceptions cannot be wrong.


    Pretty much sums up the problems with modern philosophy and the failure of the last 30 years of leftist idealism in the US. Speaks well to the Mike’s obsessive and fallacious self-defined and self-serving interpretation of “fairness”.

  32. T. J. Babson said, on March 3, 2014 at 1:44 pm

    A prediction from The Diplomad:

    Without a doubt President Obama and John “Xmas in Cambodia” Kerry have fallen into yet another trap put out by the wily Putin-Lavrov hunting pair. Kerry’s announced trip to Kiev, for example, is a classic scramble by a misadministration with no idea of what to do. I am willing to bet that Kerry’s visit, far from being a demonstration of support for Ukrainian sovereignty, will be a Chamberlain-to-the-Czechs message of “don’t increase tensions by resisting aggression.” I am almost certain Kerry will advise Ukraine to roll over, and accept the loss of Crimea in exchange, maybe, for some vague promise from the West to help preserve the remainder of Ukraine. Kerry’s visit certainly will do nothing to dissuade Moscow as Putin and Lavrov have taken measure of their “adversaries” and found them wanting.


  33. magus71 said, on March 3, 2014 at 2:44 pm

    WTP: Why?

    • WTP said, on March 3, 2014 at 3:07 pm

      Obviously not my father’s Okinawa, and not just due to the lack of mud. Of course back in the day Milton Berle, Bob Hope, and such would entertain the troops in drag…and they didn’t have the legs for it. Hopefully it’s just young guys (and gals) goofing. A woman I used to shoot pool with had a daughter, graduate from the AF academy, stationed in Okinawa. I suspected she (daughter) was gay. Of course as a lesbian she was at the other end of the gay spectrum, flying special forces and such into danger zones and was in a firefight or two in A-stan. Or so I was told. Eh. In general, I dunno. I could cop-out here and say “your generation, dude”, but I can’t find my clown nose.

      • magus71 said, on March 4, 2014 at 9:45 am

        I say that a sense of shame is a necessary aspect of a sense of honor. Since these people do not have one, they do not have the other.

        But I suppose that the shame is on me for believing in such irrational things as honor.

    • TJB said, on March 3, 2014 at 4:33 pm

      Tell me this isn’t what it appears to be.

      • magus71 said, on March 3, 2014 at 5:04 pm

        Oh yes it is. Remember the reasons I gave a couple years ago for not reenlisting after seeing where this was going? The Army needs no more distractions fro its mission of killing bad people. It already has too many.

        Enjoy the decline.

    • T. J. Babson said, on March 3, 2014 at 4:37 pm

      What would Barry Sadler say?

      • WTP said, on March 3, 2014 at 10:16 pm

        And somewhere Jane Fonda, Bill Ayers, the Obamas, etc. point their fingers and snigger at the bitter clingers of the Green Berets. But in the time that was made there was also this from The Duke on Dino’s show:

        Of course some in faculty lounges snigger at this as well.

        • magus71 said, on March 4, 2014 at 9:53 am

          They don’t make em like that anymore.

          • WTP said, on March 4, 2014 at 10:13 am

            Yes they do. You, and I presume most of your company are still there. The problem is we don’t celebrate men like that anymore. Duke and Dino were doing what they could to speak up and refute teh stupid around them. We, all of us, have an obligation to speak up and object to the very bad ideas that are perpetrated every day in the media, academia, Hollywood, the music industry, etc. There’s a saying by, I believe, Confucius to wit “When the student is ready, the teacher will appear”. When we as a society emphasize celebrating freedom, strong wills, independence, thinking for one’s self, etc. and speak against the sophistry, the blame-America-firsters, those who constantly push class warfare and who denigrate work or mock the productive as “lucky” men with strong values will appear. Did you see the post I put on your blog regarding the Soviet naval officer who took over his ship and tried to inspire a “true communist” revolution against the corruption he saw around him? Many ways to take that story, but in this regard he was a good man. His compass was flawed by the sea of sh*t he was educated in. What struck me was the man had a thirst for knowledge (which he was prohibited from accessing) and strong principles. Like I said in my post, I could go many ways with that story, but even in the sh*t of a communist society, there are those who say “No”. Of course in his case it was for the wrong reasons. But I think you know what I’m getting at.

            • magus71 said, on March 4, 2014 at 10:41 am

              You’re right, we don’t celebrate them. But I have to believe that as in economics, when the demand goes does, eventually the supply does, too.

              Your point about the Soviet Naval Officer is well taken. The same can be said for Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, who penned The Gulag Archipelago. Of course it took him a decade in the world’s worst prison to see, but he eventually became one of the wisest people I have ever heard speak or read the writings of. He wrote another book (one of several) called Warning to the West–actually it’s a compilation of speeches he gave. It was published in 1976 and he pretty much talks about all of the things that are now coming home to roost.

              Here’s a line:

              “…they warn you of what is now taking place and of what has happened in the past. But the proud skyscrapers stand on, jut into the sky, and say: It will never happen here. This will never come to us. It is not possible here.

              It can happen. It is possible. As a Russian proverb says: When it happens to you, then you will know it’s true.’

              But do we really have to wait for the moemnt when the knife is at our throat? Couldn’t it be possible ahead of time, to assess soberly the world wide menace that threatens to swallow the whole world? I was swallowed myself. I have been in the dragon’s belly, in its red-hot innards. It was unable to digest me and threw me up. I have some to you as a witness to what it is like there, in the dragon’s belly”

            • WTP said, on March 4, 2014 at 11:24 pm

              Eh, economics. The dismal science. Supply/demand chicken/egg. But to your point, if we demand that men be men, then men will create the supply and be men.

              There was a book by Sinclair “Red” Lewis called “It Can’t Happen Here” that feared the same thing from the right. Though I would argue that Lewis missed his own point. Or perhaps it was a diversion by the left. Who knows? But as to the wolf at our throats, no. Again we must stop the decay from within. No external entity poses anywhere near the existential threat as our internal decay. Our institutions that portray the productive as evil and the parasites as good. The sophistry that drives such. Our best defense is to refute this sophistry and to hold it accountable to the facts. To not let sophists strike then slink away to safety without being held accountable for their real-world failures.

      • magus71 said, on March 4, 2014 at 9:49 am

        Thanks for this.

  34. T. J. Babson said, on March 4, 2014 at 6:54 am

    All this stuff started has making me think of Jimmy Carter, and how things changed after Reagan became president. I was in the USN based out of San Diego at a place called FACSFAC. Turns out it is still around:


    I notice their logo has changed. When I first arrived the influence of the Carter era was still evident, and the logo was a fat beaver in a shirt flashing the peace symbol. Shortly after I arrived the logo was changed to a more warlike beaver. Now their logo is boring but has a chilling motto: “Control thru Surveillance.”

    The green island in the logo is San Clemente Island. That is where I used to work:


  35. Anonymous said, on March 4, 2014 at 2:28 pm

    Funny–Mike mocking me here on the Russian problem a few months back:

    Me: Wikileaks is likely fully penetrated by Russia’s FSB. The Russians are able to use Wikileaks as a front to gain intelligence, fully seizing on the current zeitgeist and meme put out by the Anonymous types.

    Mike: Ah, the Cold War. Who would have suspected we’d look back and miss the days when we had a rational enemy?

    And he still doesn’t think Snowden was recruited by Russian Intelligence.


    • Michael LaBossiere said, on March 5, 2014 at 12:16 pm

      I’ve never doubted that the Russians are one of our opponents. However, I’m still waiting for actual evidence that Wikileaks is Russian run. I have no doubt that they happily go through all the documents Wikileaks dumps, but that does not entail that Snowden is a Russian operative. Sure, he could be-but he might simply be what he claims to be.

  36. T. J. Babson said, on March 5, 2014 at 2:02 pm

    Magus, WTP, what say you? Is it OK for the CIA to spy on Congress? I’m telling you, these agencies are out of control and are a law unto themselves.

    McClatchy and the New York Times reported Wednesday that the CIA had secretly monitored computers used by committee staffers preparing the inquiry report, which is said to be scathing not only about the brutality and ineffectiveness of the agency’s interrogation techniques but deception by the CIA to Congress and policymakers about it. The CIA sharply disputes the committee’s findings.

    Udall, a Colorado Democrat and one of the CIA’s leading pursuers on the committee, appeared to reference that surreptitious spying on Congress, which Udall said undermined democratic principles.

    “As you are aware, the CIA has recently taken unprecedented action against the committee in relation to the internal CIA review and I find these actions to be incredibly troubling for the Committee’s oversight powers and for our democracy,” Udall wrote to Obama on Tuesday.


    • WTP said, on March 5, 2014 at 2:24 pm

      No, it is not OK. But neither is it a good idea to trust what you read in The Guardian. Do you have another source?

    • magus71 said, on March 5, 2014 at 6:23 pm

      But the CIA’s IG referred this issue to the Justice Department. If they were a law unto themselves, why did they report themselves to the JD?

      There is no amount of rules and regs and oversight that can contain a reprobate society. Sometimes I think TJ and WTP part ways with me when I say that, generally speaking, Americans are less moral than they used to be. I read a newspaper article the other day about my old police department. They are having a very hard time finding people who are A) Qualified and B) Not criminals.

      This same thing goes for the military and our 3 letter agencies. The problems we see are endemic to out society and the result of throwing away our Christian heritage. We are now merely settling into the same positions of nations throughout history that were not Christian. Fundamental truth about humans: If they think they can get away with something bad, they’ll try it. There is no longer the strong inner barriers against doing wrong that our forefathers had. If Christianity is a myth or not, how do atheists get around this?

      • T. J. Babson said, on March 5, 2014 at 10:19 pm

        The IG is not a total tool of the DCI.

        Created in 1989, the statutory Inspector General (IG) is responsible for independent oversight of the CIA. The IG is nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, and may only be removed from office by the president. The IG’s authorities and responsibilities are provided in 50 U.S.C. §403q. Although the IG reports to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the statute creates obligations and responsibilities to both the Director and to the Congress.

        The CIA Office of Inspector General (OIG) is an independent office of the CIA that is headed by the Inspector General and promotes economy, efficiency, effectiveness and accountability in the management of CIA activities by performing independent audits, inspections, investigations, and reviews of CIA programs and operations. The OIG also seeks to detect and deter fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement. The OIG advances the Agency’s mission by providing findings and recommendations expeditiously to the Director, the Agency and the Congressional intelligence committees. The OIG works directly with the Department of Justice and other appropriate federal agencies when investigating alleged violations of law.


      • T. J. Babson said, on March 5, 2014 at 10:26 pm

        “Sometimes I think TJ and WTP part ways with me when I say that, generally speaking, Americans are less moral than they used to be.”

        Yes and no, Magus. It really depends on whether you include things like promiscuity and homosexuality under the rubric of “morality.”

        Have you read Dostoyevsky? He also wonders if morality can survive the death of God.

        • magus71 said, on March 6, 2014 at 9:52 am

          “If there is no God, everything is permitted.”~The Brothers Karamazov

        • WTP said, on March 6, 2014 at 10:18 am

          Just for the record I would include promiscuity but exclude homosexuality.

          As to Dosoyevsky’s point, attempts to eliminate God result in someone or something filling the vacuum. I believe that all that is immoral should not be illegal, neither should all that is illegal be considered immoral in limited circumstances. The law should concern itself with what the law can do. This is why the US has done so well relative to other countries over the last two centuries. Our constitutional rights are derived from natural rights. You cannot force a God on someone, you cannot force them to think a certain way. Law cannot control people’s minds and maintain a productive society. The law cannot look into people’s hearts and minds in order to know how to motivate them. Only by choice can morality be effective. But there must be morality and, unlike law which is written by lawyers in a far off capital city somewhere, we all have an obligation to ourselves and society to reinforce it. Yet it cannot be done in a preachy, browbeating kind of way or it leads to the same consequences of using the law. It must be based on rational thinking or it will not be accepted by thinking men.

          • magus71 said, on March 6, 2014 at 10:38 am

            “Our constitutional rights are derived from natural rights. You cannot force a God on someone, you cannot force them to think a certain way. Law cannot control people’s minds and maintain a productive society. The law cannot look into people’s hearts and minds in order to know how to motivate them.”

            I completely agree. I’m not for using the law to force Christianity on anyone. But the Left is doing everything it can to try to prevent me from even using reason to convince people.

            • WTP said, on March 6, 2014 at 11:03 am

              Exactly. So drinks all around?

        • WTP said, on March 8, 2014 at 10:22 am

          The conclusion of this article addresses the general idea that I believe (excerpted here), though I recommend the wole thing.

          In 2000, Jonathan Rauch, a (gay) brilliant intellectual and champion of gay marriage, wrote a wonderful essay on “hidden law,” which he defined as “the norms, conventions, implicit bargains, and folk wisdoms that organize social expectations, regulate everyday behavior, and manage interpersonal conflicts.” Basically, hidden law is the unwritten legal and ethical code of civil society. Abortion, assisted suicide, and numerous other hot-button issues were once settled by people doing right as they saw it without seeking permission from the government.

          “Hidden law is exceptionally resilient,” Rauch observed, “until it is dragged into politics and pummeled by legalistic reformers.” That crowd believes all good things must be protected by law and all bad things must be outlawed.

          As society has grown more diverse (a good thing) and social trust has eroded (a bad thing), the authority of hidden law has atrophied. Once it was understood that a kid’s unlicensed lemonade stand, while technically “illegal,” was just fine. Now kids are increasingly asked, “Do you have a permit for this?”

          Gay activists won the battle for hidden law a long time ago. If they recognized that, the sane response would be, “You don’t want my business because I’m gay? Go to hell,” followed by a vicious review on Yelp. The baker would pay a steep price for a dumb decision, and we’d all be spared a lot of stupid talk about yellow stars.

  37. T. J. Babson said, on March 5, 2014 at 10:33 pm

    A must read from the Diplomad: Cage Fighter vs. Pajama Boy; Putin Confronts the West

    Time to face facts. None of Obama’s supposed “talents” works when dealing with Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, the Shining Shooting Tsar of Eurasia–arguably the smartest national leader in the world. Let me back up. “Smartest” might be the wrong word. Yes, it definitely is the wrong one. That word is too loosely defined and too easily pinned on too many. What makes Putin successful and such a formidable geopolitical foe (thank you, Mitt Romney) is not that he is just “smart,” but that he is a throw-back to a different era. He hunts and fishes, and doesn’t care about the political fashion and sensitivities of the day; pajama boy has no place in Putin’s cage fighter universe. Despite his upbringing as a Communist, he is now devoutly religious and wants to see religion restored to Russian life. As the jihadis have discovered, they have in Putin a rival as ruthless and religiously committed as they, and not bound by the conventions of political correctness.


    • magus71 said, on March 6, 2014 at 6:39 am

      Before Obama our allies respected us and our enemies feared us.

  38. T. J. Babson said, on March 6, 2014 at 7:42 am

    Way off topic, but this is pretty funny.

  39. T. J. Babson said, on March 6, 2014 at 7:55 am

    Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

    The consequences of Mr. Obama’s Carterization overseas are coming so fast it’s hard to keep track. Ukraine, though important, is the tip of the iceberg. Here’s what else happened in the week Mr. Putin captured Crimea.

    Israel on Wednesday intercepted in the Red Sea an Iranian shipment to Gaza of dozens of Syrian-made surface-to-surface rockets. These are our new Iranian negotiating partners.

    North Korea last Thursday test-fired four short-range ballistic missiles and another this Monday. Then on Tuesday it deployed a new multiple-rocket launcher that fired four missiles with enough range to hit American and South Korean military bases near Seoul.

    In Moscow last Wednesday,Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Russia plans to use military bases in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua for its navy and to refuel strategic bombers. Three months ago, Secretary Kerry ostentatiously announced in a Washington speech, “The era of the Monroe Doctrine is over.” Naturally the Russians took this as a green light to return to one of the Soviet Union’s favorite playpens. The next day, a Russian spy ship, the Viktor Leonov SSV-175, slipped unannounced into Havana Harbor.

    Then this Wednesday, a news bulletin: “China announces 12.2% increase in military budget.” That boost comes within 24 hours of the Obama budget proposing a decline in U.S. defense spending.

    This is all in one week!


  40. WTP said, on March 6, 2014 at 10:08 pm

    See if you can spot Gilbert Gottfried…hint, he’s in drag…sort of

    • T. J. Babson said, on March 6, 2014 at 10:52 pm

      Good video, but missed Gilbert.

  41. T. J. Babson said, on March 6, 2014 at 10:51 pm

    Dripping with condescension. Are they born that way, or do they learn it at an Ivy League University?

    • WTP said, on March 7, 2014 at 7:48 am

      Condescension can be learned at any university. It’s what makes recent college graduates so insufferable at times. You can even find it at State colleges. Having real life experiences and objective responsibilities usually clears that up.

  42. T. J. Babson said, on March 8, 2014 at 11:16 am

    What say you, Magus?

    There are things you expect to see at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and there are things you don’t. One of the things you probably don’t is an audience cheering and applauding arguments for legalizing pot and bemoaning the war on drugs.

    A panel titled “Rocky Mountain High” held Thursday afternoon started out as a debate between Mary Katharine Ham of Fox and Hot Air and Christopher Beach a staffer for former Drug Czar William Bennett’s radio show. But as the debate wore on it became clear the real disagreement was between Beach and the overwhelming majority of the audience.

    The Q&A portion of the panel lasted well over an hour. Person after person stood up to challenge Beach’s position on the war on drugs or the dangers of pot. Toward the end of the 100 minutes it had become a kind of joke.


    • Anonymous said, on March 8, 2014 at 2:47 pm


      One thing we must consider is the fact that these drugs are illegal in most other countries .Even if we stop the war on our end, the rest of the world won’t .Do we want drug tourists here? We must also consider that most drug users are not libertarians that read Reason magazine .

      Do we want to stop the war because we don’t think it’s winnable (a poor argument in my mind), or because we think these laws hurt our society? Or is it for freedoms sake? Also , what drugs are we talking about?

      Additionally, I’ve had debates with people who compared to most are extremely well educated about the issue yet still spout psuedo scientific bologna about pot. You know, we’re made to smoke pot because out brains have receptors that THC molecules can fit in to…..Or that drug use would not increase if they were legal .

      Phillip Q Wilson, smart man.


      • Anonymous said, on March 8, 2014 at 2:48 pm

        magus above …

      • WTP said, on March 8, 2014 at 5:29 pm

        My 2…hey, what happened to the “cents” key? We stop the drug war for the very reasons we have not won it, but not because we have not won it. It is unreasonable to try to control what people choose to ingest into their bodies. I believe such laws do hurt our society, especially how unenforceable they are. Think how the drug culture thrived in a more restricted time of the 20’s up through the 60’s. What makes us think things are gonna change (there’s that Beck theme again)?

        The above goes double for the simple raw material (plants) that grow naturally, or have grown naturally, out of the ground. Such is nearly the definition of violating natural law. A law against nature has very little hope, as nature doesn’t care about our laws.

        All that said, I believe it is in our best interest to apply “hidden law” (see my post above re NRO) now and well on into the future. I’ve gotten more than a few laughs picking on pot heads and razzing my friends who still toke. The latter is so easy to do since the doobie slows ones wits over time and saps the competitive edge. YMMV, I suppose. While I agree with you, re Aristotle and training of our youth, I think we can do just as well, if not better, via hidden law and social pressure without having to suffer the collateral damage via cynicism to the law as a whole.

  43. magus71 said, on March 8, 2014 at 3:01 pm

    Can we agree that a society that piles enough victimless crimes on top of one another may find itself a victim?

    • WTP said, on March 8, 2014 at 5:31 pm

      Yes. Who’s buying the drinks here?

      • magus71 said, on March 8, 2014 at 6:46 pm

        I’ve got the first round. What’ll you have ?

        • WTP said, on March 8, 2014 at 9:38 pm

          Seeing as we haven’t hit the vernal equinox yet, I’ll take a double of Jameson. Neat. In a couple more weeks, it gets a bit complicated.

  44. magus71 said, on March 8, 2014 at 3:05 pm

    I take an Aristotlean view on drug laws: they serve as good training for young people until they can use reason to figure out why snorting methamphetamine is bad for them.

  45. T. J. Babson said, on March 8, 2014 at 8:00 pm

    Can we agree that it is dumb to put people in jail for possession of small amounts of marijuana?

    • WTP said, on March 8, 2014 at 11:47 pm

      I’m curious how often that really happens. FWIR, you have to be pretty unlucky and/or stupid to get caught as a user. And even then I never heard of anyone doing time for simple possession. But my experience was south FL and UF. YMMV, I suppose. But yes, I do agree its a waste of cell space.

    • magus71 said, on March 9, 2014 at 6:48 am

      Yeah that’s dumb but doesnt happen in Maine. They get a fine .Usually if they are caught with a small amount they are getti ng arrested for something else and it’s discovered in a search “incident to arrest .”

    • T. J. Babson said, on March 9, 2014 at 9:15 am

      These are the laws on the books:

      Possession of marijuana is punishable by up to one year in jail and a minimum fine of $1,000 for a first conviction. For a second conviction, the penalties increase to a 15-day mandatory minimum sentence with a maximum of two years in prison and a fine of up to $2,500. Subsequent convictions carry a 90-day mandatory minimum sentence and a maximum of up to three years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000.

      Distribution of a small amount of marijuana, for no remuneration, is treated as possession. Manufacture or distribution of less than 50 plants or 50 kilograms of marijuana is punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000. For 50-99 plants or 50-99 kilograms the penalty increases not more than 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $1 million if an individual, $5 million if other than an individual for the first offense. Manufacture or distribution of 100-999 plants or 100-999 kilograms carries a penalty of 5 – 40 years in prison and a fine of $2-$5 Million. For 1000 plants or 1000 kilograms or more, the penalty increases to 10 years – life in prison and a fine of $4-$10 Million.

      Distribution of greater than 5 grams of marijuana to a minor under the age of 21 doubles the possible penalties. Distribution within 1,000 feet of a school, playground, public housing or within 100 feet of a youth center, public pool or video arcade also doubles the possible penalties.

      The sale of paraphernalia is punishable by up to three years in prison.


      • magus71 said, on March 9, 2014 at 10:45 am

        These are federal laws. Drugs convictions almost never go federal unless they are major distribution types, crossing the border or trying to get on a plane . The feds do not have the ability to prosecute a dude carrying a joint. Otherwise 10% of colorado would be in federal prison .

  46. magus71 said, on March 9, 2014 at 7:08 am

    And since socialism begets socialism , I don’t want to buy more needles or drugs for sponsorship programs or support people who’ve made themselves unemployable .Theyre better off in jail where they can’t rob liquor stores. Since personal responsibility is not a priority in our society ,society must bear the burden. Skin in the game is nature’s ultimate classroom.

  47. magus71 said, on March 9, 2014 at 8:30 am

    ‘They charge that the CIA interfered with the oversight committee’s work by tracking the materials accessed at the CIA facility by the Senate staff members.

    In a March 4 letter to President Obama, Sen. Mark Udall, a Democrat from Colorado on the intelligence committee, called the CIA’s actions “unprecedented.”

    But one U.S. official familiar with the matter told The Daily Beast Friday that the CIA only audited the database used by the staffers after Senators asked the agency to hand over an “internal review” conducted by Obama’s first CIA director, Leon Panetta. That first request was made in 2013, but it continues to be of particular interest to Udall; he’s put a hold on Obama’s nomination of Caroline Krass to be the agency’s general counsel until he gets access to the documents.

    In a March 4 letter, Udall wrote to President Obama: “I would like to know more about the origins of the review, its authorship, the context of its creation, and why its findings were ignored in the development of the CIA’s June 2013 response” to his queries on this review.

    The U.S. official, however, disputed that there was any such formal review at all. Instead, the documents Udall and others requested were summaries of what the agency had already provided to the committee with some additional comments by the low-level staff members who wrote the summaries. They did not reflect the views of the agency or even of senior analysts who have examined the efficacy of the black site program, the official added.

    “Panetta asked people to provide him with summaries of what [the CIA] provided to the Senate,” this official said. “That’s what this was.”


    • T. J. Babson said, on March 9, 2014 at 9:12 am

      “The U.S. official, however, disputed that there was any such formal review at all. Instead, the documents Udall and others requested were summaries of what the agency had already provided to the committee with some additional comments by the low-level staff members who wrote the summaries.”

      If this is true, why not just hand over the documents?

      • magus71 said, on March 9, 2014 at 10:18 am

        The ‘spying” was probably an excel spreadsheet given to Panetta listing the docs obtained by the Senate. See I come at the whole NsA/CIA thing from the perspective of considering the fundamental aspect of military/intelligence bureaucracy : risk aversion. There’s no punishment for not taking risk, therefore there’s no punishment for not defeating the enemy. It’s a check the box system, not “effects based operations “. Give some powerPoint traning on sexual harassment and the dangers of thumb drives , collect your paycheck and go home . When issues come up the media,which hasn’t a grasp on how these bureaucracies function, throws out an out of context clunker so it can have something to write about. In my experience far more effort is put in to controlling ourselves than controlling the enemy.

        How many lawyers do you think are on the CIA/NSA payrolls ? Why? Did you know that at higher echelons a JAG officer stands over the shoulder of a commander telling him if he should fire an artillery round or not? These are not the times of dark conspiracies;they are the times of self-licking ice cream cones.

        • magus71 said, on March 9, 2014 at 10:21 am

          Self-licking ice cream cone

          ‘In political jargon, a self-licking ice cream cone is a self-perpetuating system that has no purpose other than to sustain itself. The phrase appears to have been first used in 1992, in On Self-Licking Ice Cream Cones, a paper by Pete Worden about NASA’s bureaucracy.
          The phrase has come to be used as a metaphor for any similar system, particularly in contexts such as the War on Terror and the military-industrial complex.”


  48. magus71 said, on March 9, 2014 at 11:21 am

    Imagine using this story to teach math now .

    • WTP said, on March 10, 2014 at 12:37 pm

      Don’t worry. We’ll have this for a replacement shortly…

      • magus71 said, on March 10, 2014 at 6:02 pm

        At least they’re enjoying the ride.

        • magus71 said, on March 10, 2014 at 6:04 pm

          Your turn to pick up the riff TJ.

          • T. J. Babson said, on March 11, 2014 at 3:20 pm

            I’m going with “enjoying the ride.”

            • WTP said, on March 11, 2014 at 3:35 pm

              We had smoke coming from out of the back
              When I started to gain on that Cadillac
              I knew I could catch him, I thought I could pass
              But don’t you know by then we’d be low on gas

      • magus71 said, on March 10, 2014 at 6:45 pm

        “Well you’re 21 and your mom still makes your bed…and that’s too long.”

  49. WTP said, on March 11, 2014 at 12:42 pm

    The self awareness crisis in America continues unabated. Now the Girl Scouts are being used.


  50. Anonymous said, on March 12, 2014 at 6:46 pm


    • T. J. Babson said, on March 12, 2014 at 10:59 pm

      Being a leader is about inspiring people to follow you, not bossing them around. And you lead by example.


      • WTP said, on March 13, 2014 at 6:04 am

        Control language, eliminate some words and corrupt the meaning of others and you control thoughts. Orwell wrote about this extensively, not just in 1984. This sort of thing is more dangerous in the Big a brother sense than what the NSA has done. Language underlies everything we do.

      • magus71 said, on March 13, 2014 at 6:13 am

        I’m given renewed hope by reading the comments on the video. Some people get it. The attitude displayed in this video is one reason people have problems with women in combat billets. The problems and strengths of a nation are magnified in the military. What they don’t understand is how many men who were on their side 15 years ago they’ve lost.

        • magus71 said, on March 13, 2014 at 6:15 am

          And Beyonce wants to prove she’s not bossy by declaring “I’m the boss.”

        • T. J. Babson said, on March 14, 2014 at 10:13 am

          The shark has officially been jumped.

      • Michael LaBossiere said, on March 14, 2014 at 9:18 am

        Are you talking about that bossy thing? Sure, some people are leaders. But some people are just bossy. Being bossy is also gender neutral.

  51. magus71 said, on March 13, 2014 at 6:20 am

    Does anyone else see the growing rift between men and women in America? This is a very bad thing for society. I didn’t perceive this in Europe when I was there.

    • WTP said, on March 13, 2014 at 8:56 am

      Definitely. But there’s also a growing rift between women and women. Many women I’ve worked with, and additionally own Hillary-fan wife, have expressed various levels of exasperation in dealing with difficult women to the point of even saying they would rather work for men than women. The problem is, it’s the bossy ones who most often get promoted. Similar is true with men but so long as you have your facts in order, you can confront a man in authority, excepting certain protected minorities (who thus begin to resemble women), without having to worry about significant social impact. There’s much more direct give and take in the man’s world. Women tend to use social forces to get their way.

      • T. J. Babson said, on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 pm

        I predict a massive flameout with the “Ban Bossy” campaign.

        Instapundit is already visualizing a bumpersticker with Hillary’s picture covered with a circle-backslash and the words “Ban Bossy” next to it.

        • WTP said, on March 13, 2014 at 1:23 pm

          Ooohh…me want. Will look real good on my truck next to the one I have with a pic of Archie Bunker with the phrase “Deep down, you know he’s right”.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on March 14, 2014 at 9:16 am

      Going into conspiracy mode, I’d suspect that there is a deliberate attempt to create such a conflict for political advantage. Hilary 2016 and all that. Creating an “us” and “them: is standard tactics in politics. You know, like how the poor get cast as “them.”

      • WTP said, on March 14, 2014 at 9:44 am

        You know, like how the rich and successful get cast as “them.”

        There, FIFY again. And who do we all know who does that? Hmmm?

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on March 14, 2014 at 9:13 am

      Yes. But, people unfortunately use “slippery slope” when they actually mean “here is an argument showing that X will, in fact, lead to Y.” Just like people use “fallacy” when they mean “factual error” or “begs the question” when they mean “raises the question.”

      • WTP said, on March 14, 2014 at 9:48 am

        While such is not always the case, I have noticed how such is often employed in irrelevent situations as a semantics game/ruse for the purpose of distracting from the point. Kinda like dismissing an argument for non-egregious spelling errors.

  52. T. J. Babson said, on March 14, 2014 at 10:39 am

    I wonder if the goal is to turn all women into Nurse Ratched. A chilling vision…

  53. WTP said, on March 14, 2014 at 10:51 am

    The AP at work. More sophistry:

    Here is the opening graf of an AP report on “anti-abortion voters” published Wednesday:

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Calling their opponents Satan worshippers and savages, anti-abortion lawmakers on Wednesday insisted that Republican contenders keep an intense focus on social issues in the upcoming midterm elections and the 2016 presidential race.

    “Calling their opponents Satan worshippers.” That sounds pretty serious. Tell us more, AP:

    Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican who is a favorite of the tea party, said supporters of abortion rights chant “Hail, Satan” to silence their enemies. …

    “Arm-in-arm, chanting ‘Hail, Satan,’ embracing the right to take the life of a late-term child,” Cruz said of supporters of abortion rights.

    He was referencing protests in Austin, Texas, last year over an abortion bill. While anti-abortion activists were giving speeches and singing “Amazing Grace,” others tried to drown them out with chants.

    Does this constitute calling your opponent a “Satan worshipper”? Seems like Cruz is simply describing something that happened at a particular protest in Austin last year, where Democratic state senator Wendy Davis elevated her political career by filibustering legislation to ban late-term abortions.

    The AP story doesn’t bother to determine if Cruz’s claims are true, simply noting that “chants” were involved. A five-second Google search would have sufficed to confirm that, yes, pro-choice protesters chanted “Hail, Satan” on multiple occasions:


    ICYMI, video of the referenced incident at the link.

  54. magus71 said, on March 14, 2014 at 11:04 am

    Democrats Appeal to God

    “They’ll laugh, they’ll snicker. And I’ll keep trudging through the streets carrying my sign: “The End is Near!” We are a dying society. As faith in God has disintegrated, so has knowledge of good and evil. The agnostic and atheist elites will analyze, but will not find the cold, mathematical formula they seek to explain our disintegration, except to say in the form of a new social program. Here, uber-liberal Democrats find in their hearts to call out to God–and thank him for access to abortion. Nietzsche’s Transvaluation of Values is nearly complete, but not quite. As in Sodom and Gomorrah, God was willing to save a city from destruction should there be a very small percent of people whom remained righteous. America remains the most faithful Western nation in existence, which isn’t saying much at this point in time.

    America’s time is coming. We are walking on slippery rocks. Just as the great sermoneer, Jonathan Edwards quoted:

    Their foot shall slide in due time, Deuteronomy 32:35.

    If we continue, and we probably will, one day we will look around and wonder how our great cities became smoldering ash, whether in metaphor or in reality. In due time, when God has had enough.

    50 million abortions a year. The great shift toward matriarchal society has wrought annihilation of which Mao, Hitler and Stalin would be proud. Men have made war against armed men. The modern feminist has picked up the sword against a dreaming child. Disintegrating family structures. Voting trends are already showing the results of massive demographic changes. Fact: Immigrants and Blacks vote for more government. They will not stop. They’re world view tells them that government makes and enables life. And just as the prophets of old heard from the people they warned: “We’ve heard the warnings before, shut up and go away”, many will ignore the obvious, that America cannot continue down the road it’s on. Spending is a moral issue. Those whom chronically take more than they earn have a moral problem. We as a people have a moral problem. A nation of consumerism, hedonism, nihilism, socialism. We better find more theism.

    Rolling Hot; September 2013

    • WTP said, on March 14, 2014 at 11:26 am

      one day we will look around and wonder how our great cities became smoldering ash
      Detroit? To be followed by St. Louis or Chicago or the state of California. All in good time.

  55. magus71 said, on March 16, 2014 at 8:14 am

    No one can convince me that our military isn’t producing better people than our political system.

    • magus71 said, on March 16, 2014 at 8:35 am

      WTP, this video should in part provide an answer to your question about soldier’s willingness to fight and shoot in combat, and how they act after combat which they win: they’re happy, not mopey. Fighting and winning improves morale. Being a sitting target because of stupid ROEs destroys morale.

      The disingenuous comments made on that other blog are pretty much destroyed here. One young guy mentioned by the commander in this video has 8 purple hearts. The nonsense mythology about soldiers not wanting to shoot back at the enemy needs to be destroyed, too. Most soldiers are mopey, emo college kids who get depressed over the cruelty of the world.

      • magus71 said, on March 16, 2014 at 8:43 am

        Most soldiers are *NOT* mopey, emo college kids who get depressed over the cruelty of the world.

      • wtp said, on March 16, 2014 at 11:41 am

        This story raises so many issues that piss me off I don’t know where to start. It’s great reporting but (I suspect) shitty editing, yet the story is and has been out there for quite some time. This I believe is a 2010 story? Where is the positive aspect that we’re killing these bastards at a 15:0 or so ratio? I was a strong supporter of the war in A’stan until we got UBL. Not that he’s gone, I’ve felt we should pull out. But OTOH, we are killing the off at a good clip (ad this is most important) with absolutely shitty ROE. If we had these ROE in WWII Japan would own east Asia and the Pacific and the Germans most of Europe. The villiagers are more scared of the Taliban than they are of us. They want our help, but what good is our help if they’re dead? If we had more practical ROE, our kill ratios would be much higher. Philosophical question…would it be better if more innocent villagers were killed by us if fewer were killed and threatened by the Taliban? But such a question is untouchable. Why? Because of the BS that the left, and even some on the right, perpetuate in our society via the media and ESPECIALLY academia. As I said, much, much more I could say about this vid that is important but just don’t have the time or place to do so.

        • magus71 said, on March 16, 2014 at 4:20 pm

          I’ll provide a reply via blog post. my immediate answer to the problem is to examine how we did counterinsurgency in the Philippines Insurrection. The US Army is very bad in it’s Lessons Learned program ( a real program.). It immediately forgot all the things we did in the Phillipines in Vietnam.

          • WTP said, on March 16, 2014 at 6:44 pm

            Yes! The parallels and incongruities with the Philippines are exactly what I was thinking of, amongst others. The parallels and such that my father saw with that effort in WWII and what little I’ve read from Pershing’s efforts before that, are very interesting. The war in Vietnam was a very frustrating thing for him to follow. I didn’t understand it at the time but as we talked in his later years I understood what had made him so angry and why he was “out of touch” with the reality of the 70’s. I say that dripping with irony because I now understand how out of touch this country was then and how much worse things have gotten.

  56. T. J. Babson said, on March 16, 2014 at 8:54 am

    Did you guys see this one?

    • magus71 said, on March 16, 2014 at 9:39 am

      One of the guys at work mentioned it last week.

      Heh, the woman says “When this sort of thing happens to you, I assure you you will do the same thing.”

      Ummm, no I won’t. The day I can’t handle the family cat is the day I get a pierced lip. Oh wait….

    • magus71 said, on March 16, 2014 at 9:45 am

      “What this dog saw Sunday night can’t be unseen.”

      • wtp said, on March 16, 2014 at 11:44 am

        Is it any wonder we’re Putin’s bitch.

        • wtp said, on March 16, 2014 at 11:53 am

          Of course what can we expect when mealy-mouthed dipshits like this are in charge of our foriegn policy vs. Russia:

          We hope President Putin will recognize that none of what we’re saying is meant as a threat, it’s not meant in a personal way. It is meant as a matter of respect…

  57. WTP said, on March 22, 2014 at 3:14 pm

    Philosophy prof experiences perception/reality disconnect. Cries of discrimination ensue. Basically nothing new here.


    • T. J. Babson said, on March 22, 2014 at 4:10 pm

      I saw this a couple of days ago and something doesn’t seem right. I don’t think the person ever received a formal job offer. Job offers come in the mail, are signed by the Provost of the university, and I don’t think they can be easily rescinded just because a person tries to negotiate a better deal. Something is fishy here.

      • wtp said, on March 22, 2014 at 5:16 pm

        Yeah, it reads kinda funny to me as well. Especially given that while the school was once religiously affiliated and has a significantly Christian sounding name. Seen anything from the college denying? The thing is, to make up such a story is even more pathetic.

    • magus71 said, on March 23, 2014 at 7:12 am

      This is perfectly in line with the “Ban Bosse” campaign. It’s a disconnect between the modern matriarchy and reality. the modern matriarch understands little about diplomacy, give and take, the needs of others. Tellingly, one commentator says that she (the phd) should hire a lawyer because the university probably rejected her because of the maternity leave request, when in fact that was probably the only reasonable request she made. That’s how out of touch the elitist woman is. The age of “Girl Power” is backfiring, because no one likes them.

      I also find it interesting that a social clique that is likely to be against self-interest in all its forms is actually ruthlessly self-interested when it comes to negotiating a contract that involves themselves. And then is shocked that a school can say “no thanks.”

      An excellent comment on that link:

      I’m with the university on this one.

      “1) An increase of my starting salary to $65,000, which is more in line with what assistant professors in philosophy have been getting in the last few years.”

      Is this what professors that *that institution* have been getting in the past few years? Because that’s what matters most. If she wants to be paid more than everyone else getting hired there, she needs to demonstrate why she is that much more valuable than other new colleagues at that institution.

      “2) An official semester of maternity leave.”

      This is reasonable, and may even be legally required. However, this gets buried in unreasonable demands.

      “3) A pre-tenure sabbatical at some point during the bottom half of my tenure clock.”

      Again, do all new hires get this kind of leave? If not, see #1.

      “4) No more than three new class preps per year for the first three years.”

      This is something that can be reasonable negotiated, but without knowing what she was hired to do, it’s a tough call. If she was hired to explicitly teach in multiple areas, then it’s an unreasonable request.

      “5) A start date of academic year 2015 so I can complete my postdoc.”

      Nope. If you want to finish your post-doc, that’s fine. But you don’t get to hold up that university’s need for a new faculty member so you can not teach (and presumably go back on the market again). They have a need for the following year; if you can’t satisfy that need, then you shouldn’t be hired for the job. That alone is reason enough to offer it to someone else.

      She was offered the job, and told them: I need more money, a research leave (that, presumably, others won’t be getting, else it would be part of her contract already), and a year off before I start. Nope. If I’m on that hiring committee, I pull the offer too.”

  58. WTP said, on March 23, 2014 at 12:49 pm

    This is why we must attend and pay close attention in our diversity classes. So we know how to politely handle these misunderstandings. FGM=Female Genital Mutilation

    In another, a suspect contacted an FGM helpline to request the procedure for his two daughters after misunderstanding the purpose of the service for victims.


  59. WTP said, on March 24, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    From Greg Gutfeld’s new book:

    “In February 2013 it was revealed that Facebook paid no income taxes for 2012. As reported by CNN, among other places, the social network was due a tax refund of almost 430 million bucks. Now, this is a company that made one billion before taxes (which buys approximately 50 million hoodies for Mark Zuckerberg). But they were able to secure the refund because of a tax deduction from stock options issued to Facebook employees.

    I won’t pretend to understand how this works (as an English major, I have no discernible skills other than spelling discernible correctly), but I know this: that because this company happened to be Facebook, the story was a one-day affair. It came and went like an ice cream headache, leaving neither a bruise nor a hickey on the Zuckerberg Empire. If this company were something that actually made something in a factory or field, it would be roundly condemned by every single media hack on the planet.”


  60. WTP said, on March 25, 2014 at 9:03 am

    Yes but A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines or so said some guy who went on to say man is timid and apologetic; he is no longer upright; he dares not say ‘I think,’ ‘I am,’ but quotes some saint or sage.after he began that very piece quoting sage. Poets, go figure….but he was right. 😉

  61. T. J. Babson said, on March 26, 2014 at 7:38 am

    Ouch. That’s gotta hurt.

  62. magus71 said, on March 26, 2014 at 7:47 am

    Regardless of what the vegan militants say, saturated fat does not cause heart disease. This study did meta analysis of 600,000 people.

    “The investigators found that total saturated fatty acid, whether measured in the diet or in the bloodstream as a biomarker, was not associated with coronary disease risk in the observational studies. Similarly, when analyzing the studies that involved assessments of the consumption of total monounsaturated fatty acids, long-chain omega-3 and omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids, there were no significant associations between consumption and cardiovascular risk.”



  63. T. J. Babson said, on March 27, 2014 at 9:31 am

    A must read from VDH. What say you, Mike?

    This Dems @ Work III is loading pretty slowly–we probably need a Dems @ Work IV soon… (Dems have been busy…)

    What distinguishes democracies from tinhorn dictatorships and totalitarian monstrosities are our permanent meritocratic government bureaus that remain nonpartisan and honestly report the truth.

    The Benghazi, Associated Press and National Security Agency scandals are scary, but not as disturbing as growing doubts about the honesty of permanent government itself.

    It is no longer crackpot to doubt the once impeccable and nonpartisan IRS. When it assured the public that it was not making decisions about tax-exempt status based on politics, it lied. One of its top commissioners, Lois Lerner, resigned and invoked the Fifth Amendment.

    A system of voluntary tax reporting rests on trust. If the IRS itself is untruthful, will it be able to expect truthful compliance from taxpayers?

    Many doubt the officially reported government unemployment rates. That statistic is vital in assessing economic growth and is of enormous political importance in the way citizens vote.

    It was reported in November that the Census Bureau may have fabricated survey results during the 2012 presidential campaign, sending false data to the Labor Department that could have altered official employment statistics.

    In the 1990s, the method of assessing the official unemployment rate was massaged to make it seem lower than it actually was. Rules were changed to ignore millions who had been out of work longer than 52 weeks. They were suddenly classified as permanent dropouts and not part of the idled workforce.

    Does the government release an accurate report on quarterly Gross Domestic Product growth — another vital barometer of how the economy is doing? Maybe not. Last year, the Bureau of Economic Analysis for the first time factored research and development costs of businesses into statistics on investment growth.

    Suddenly, a cost became proof of business output and thus was added into the business investment contribution to GDP. That new accounting gimmick may have added hundreds of billions of dollars into the equation of figuring GDP growth last year alone. Not surprisingly, the government reported unexpectedly high 2.8 percent GDP growth after the changes.

    Is inflation really as low as the government insists? In recent times the government has not just counted the increase in the prices of goods, but also factored into its calculus theories about changing consumer buying habits when prices increase. The changes have resulted in officially lowered inflation rates.

    No one knows how many Americans have now bought and paid for Affordable Care Act health insurance policies. There is no accurate information about how many young people have enrolled — critical to the success of Obamacare. Nor do Americans know how many enrollees were previously uninsured. Nor does the public know how many enrollees simply switched insurance from Medicaid to the Affordable Care Act. There is no information about how many actually have paid their premiums.

    No one knows how many foreign citizens who entered the U.S. illegally were apprehended inside the United States and returned to their country of origin last year — a figure vital for any compromise on passing comprehensive immigration reform.

    The Obama administration claims near-record numbers of deportations. In fact, once again government agencies — in this case the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — have mysteriously changed the way they compile statistics. The ICE now counts as deportations those foreign nationals whom the Border Patrol immediately stops or turns away at the border. Such detentions were not previously counted as deportations.

    The result is that bureaucrats can report near-record numbers of deportations, while privately assuring the administration that immigration enforcement has been greatly relaxed.

    There is a pattern here. Changes in data collection seem to have a predictable result: Inflation and unemployment rates become lower. Economic growth becomes greater. The IRS focuses on government skeptics. The Affordable Care Act is not in trouble. Illegal immigration is not such a problem.

    If the people increasingly believe that bureaucrats try to alter realty to reflect preconceived ideologies or the goals of the particular regime in power, then America as we know it is finished.

    Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/03/27/massaging_of_critical_data_undermines_our_society_122077.html#ixzz2xAZAalr3
    Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter

  64. magus71 said, on March 27, 2014 at 11:35 am

  65. magus71 said, on March 27, 2014 at 2:25 pm

    The hero of millions of Americans. It’s more Brave New World than 1984. The fish is rotting from the tail. the head gets its power from the tail in America.

    • TJB said, on March 27, 2014 at 9:07 pm

      I never knew he was such a jerk. Was he under oath?

      • magus71 said, on March 28, 2014 at 5:15 am

        Not sure. I’m assuming he had to swear to tell the truth. Just goes to show what being spoiled can do. Now extrapolate this to an entire society.

  66. magus71 said, on March 27, 2014 at 2:52 pm

    And here’s a guy who was worthy of mention by President Obama. And a hero of millions. But in this society, I’m the one who needs reprogramming?

    • TJB said, on March 27, 2014 at 9:15 pm

      He might do better against Putin than Obama. His threat was pretty convincing.

      • WTP said, on March 27, 2014 at 9:29 pm

        Bieber is an increasingly irrelevant fool whom i doubt is taken seriously by millions. Thousands maybe. We lost a hockey game and got stuck with him. Now this POS is another matter. That the POTUS would even have this thug on his radar, that is a national disgrace. Especially given this thug’s unworthy status in the black community. If you had made a movie with this story line 10 years ago re the first black president having any even remote acknowledgement of such a scumbag, they’d call you racist. Just shy of Idiocracy incarnate.

    • WTP said, on April 7, 2014 at 11:03 pm

      More on Lil Wayne. His deep poetry about killin’, ho’n, and drug’n are to be admired and used as study aides. But don’t chew that pop-tart into the shape of a gun.


  67. magus71 said, on March 28, 2014 at 5:41 am

    Amazing how scientific consensus can change so rapidly. Even the NY Times now concedes–fat does not hurt us. This author has some excellent advice, which from what I’ve seen is where Gary Taubes is now leaning: Abandon fake food for real food, and you’re good to go. Next, Global Warming mania.

    “Julia Child, goddess of fat, is beaming somewhere. Butter is back, and when you’re looking for a few chunks of pork for a stew, you can resume searching for the best pieces — the ones with the most fat. Eventually, your friends will stop glaring at you as if you’re trying to kill them.

    That the worm is turning became increasingly evident a couple of weeks ago, when a meta-analysis published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine found that there’s just no evidence to support the notion that saturated fat increases the risk of heart disease. (In fact, there’s some evidence that a lack of saturated fat may be damaging.) The researchers looked at 72 different studies and, as usual, said more work — including more clinical studies — is needed. For sure. But the days of skinless chicken breasts and tubs of I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter may finally be drawing to a close.”


    • T. J. Babson said, on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 pm

      They are just catching up with Gary Taubes.

  68. T. J. Babson said, on March 28, 2014 at 11:11 pm

    Ted Cruz is a very smart man.

  69. magus71 said, on March 31, 2014 at 7:29 pm

    Global Warming disaster scenario continues to unravel.

    “A modest warming of the planet will result in a net reduction of human mortality from temperature-related events. More lives are saved by global warming via the amelioration of cold-related deaths than those lost under excessive heat. Global warming will have a negligible influence on human morbidity and the spread of infectious diseases, a phenomenon observed in virtually all parts of the world.

    There is little or no risk of increasing food insecurity due to global warming or rising atmospheric CO2 levels. Farmers and others who depend on rural livelihoods for income are benefitting from rising agricultural productivity throughout the world, including in parts of Asia and Africa where the need for increased food supplies is most critical. Rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels play a key role in the realization of such benefits.

    There is no support for the model-based projection that precipitation in a warming world becomes more variable and intense. In fact, some observational data suggest just the opposite, and provide support for the proposition that precipitation responds more to cyclical variations in solar activity.”


  70. T. J. Babson said, on March 31, 2014 at 10:32 pm

    I don’t have a problem moving away from fossil fuels to renewables, but it is a mistake to give any power to the U.N.

    Seriously, though, we are not putting our money where our mouth is. Our *big* effort in solar fuel research amounts to $25 million per year: http://solarfuelshub.org/ This is a pittance.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on April 2, 2014 at 1:34 pm

      Moon-based solar stations. Power beamed down via lasers. Side benefit: we can draw a red line that actually kills stuff when someone tries to cross it.

  71. T. J. Babson said, on April 1, 2014 at 9:44 am

    Yes, indeed. Keep your eye on TC.

  72. magus71 said, on April 2, 2014 at 10:02 am

    Oh oh. say isn’t so. Finally, studies are starting to show what heuristics have told us all along: Vegetarians are unhealthy. I mostly harp on this because I want it to be a shining example of what can happen when we view the world as it should be instead of how it is. Don’t underestimate the subliminal reasons behind vegetarianism; it’s not all about health. Also, there are very few vegetarian cultures in the world, and those that are suffer from massive mall-nutrition, and have some of the lowest recorded IQs, such as in some parts of India. Notice that in the pasted portion below, it mentions that the study showed higher rates of mental illness in vegetarians, something I’ve noticed for years.

    Still want your meatless Mondays, Mike?

    “suffer significantly more often from anxiety/depression.”

    “A new study from the Medical University of Graz in Austria finds that vegetarians are more physically active, drink less alcohol and smoke less tobacco than those who consume meat in their diets. Vegetarians also have a higher socioeconomic status and a lower body mass index. But the vegetarian diet — characterized by a low consumption of saturated fats and cholesterol that includes increased intake of fruits, vegetables and whole-grain products — carries elevated risks of cancer, allergies and mental health disorders.”


    • T. J. Babson said, on April 2, 2014 at 10:31 am

      I often wonder if young people today will live as long as their parents. Magus, what do you think?

      • magus71 said, on April 2, 2014 at 10:53 am

        I think they will, probably longer even. The trend is to longer life in America, and though this could change in the future, it doesn’t seem like it will change too quickly, though even this is possible given what happened to Russia post Soviet collapse.

        One problem as you’ve noted in other articles is attaching certain phenomena to politics, as with global warming. The vegetarians attached themselves to the left, thus the vegetarian/global warming/health grand-unified theorem.

        Now, another problem, is what the quality of that life will be, for though long life is in my mind an indicator that a person has done some things right, in the modern day this may not be the case. What we are already seeing, and what we will see when these kids are our age, is a deep unhappiness, because as Charles Murray has pointed out, the four fundamental keys to societal happiness and success, family, community, faith, vocation, are beginning to weaken. We can survive with only one or two of them, but not without all of them.

        When these four things are eroded for another few decades, then the life-span will begin a downward trend, particularly in “fishtown”. The elites will continue to live longer, while holding on to their fantasies of lifting fishtown from the dregs via government subsidies.

        • T. J. Babson said, on April 2, 2014 at 10:59 am

          I’m thinking that lots of autoimmune diseases are increasing. Obesity is high. Lots of kids don’t play sports, etc.

          • magus71 said, on April 2, 2014 at 11:12 am

            Life span stats are primarily subject to infant mortality rates. If someone survives birth, they are likely to live at least 60 years. Additionally, plague and epidemics wiped out huge portions of the population in the past.

            The system is set up to for the “Too big to fail”, population. They won’t be very functional or happy, but they’ll live quite a long time on societal life support. The burden, through time, will increasingly go to the 1% the Mike despises. Until finally that system collapses. or perhaps something beforehand will happen, like a massive power grid failure which would quickly separate the people with no skills and no physical capabilities from those who can take care of themselves.

            • T. J. Babson said, on April 2, 2014 at 11:56 am

              Speaking of power grid failure, I’ve been told “One Second After” is very good, but I haven’t read it myself.

              From Amazon.com website:

              New York Times best selling author William R. Forstchen now brings us a story which can be all too terrifyingly real…a story in which one man struggles to save his family and his small North Carolina town after America loses a war, in one second, a war that will send America back to the Dark Ages…A war based upon a weapon, an Electro Magnetic Pulse (EMP). A weapon that may already be in the hands of our enemies.

              Months before publication, One Second After has already been cited on the floor of Congress as a book all Americans should read, a book already being discussed in the corridors of the Pentagon as a truly realistic look at a weapon and its awesome power to destroy the entire United States, literally within one second. It is a weapon that the Wall Street Journal warns could shatter America. In the tradition of On the Beach, Fail Safe and Testament, this book, set in a typical American town, is a dire warning of what might be our future…and our en

  73. WTP said, on April 2, 2014 at 11:49 am

    “Teaching is a political act, and you can’t choose to be neutral. You are either a pawn used to perpetuate a system of oppression or you are fighting against it,” Radersma said during the session. “And if you think you are neutral, you are a pawn.”


    Of course the question is pawn for whom?

  74. magus71 said, on April 2, 2014 at 4:06 pm

    Sorry guys, but this is a mental illness. Calling it otherwise helps no one.


  75. WTP said, on April 6, 2014 at 7:28 am

    It’s amusing, to me anyway, to watch the sensitive snowflakes of academia turn on the more sensitive snowflakes of acadamia. The Trigger Warning trend has the feminist left, and potentially other leftist academia if not already happening, turning on itself. Read the comments for the real fun.


    The tortured logic itself should come with a trigger warning. As the comments flowed off topic, I found this to be fun ride:
    For example the notion of ritual purity, which nearly every culture seems to have some version of , can be approached by first talking about some strange-to-the-students custom somewhere far away, and then asking them to see the same thing in how they would feel about spitting into a glass of water and then drinking from it, or sharing a toothbrush with someone they kiss regularly, and then extending the idea to the fairly common notion that if an agriculture company engages in deplorable practices toward workers, the food it packages is tainted.

    You see TJ, arguing with academics from the perspective that they actually believe anything is its own fallacy. You must try to establish in no uncertain terms what it is they actually stand for. Self defined foundations such as a preconceived notion of what is safe or fair or just are like building your argument upon sand. Words with slippery meanings build weak arguments that fall to pieces when challenged either by reality or even in the ivory tower by those hungry for their own slice of attention.

    • T. J. Babson said, on April 6, 2014 at 8:48 am

      Maybe there is hope.

      I get the impression from the comments that a lot of people are worried that this PC nonsense is out of control and might come back and bite them.

      I like the comment that maybe they should provide a trigger warning at birth…

  76. T. J. Babson said, on April 6, 2014 at 8:50 am

    Mike, we really need a new D@W thread. This one is groaning under the strain.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: