I was reading some news articles at website and came across this video. It stunned me. It is from Fox news and is from one of their shows. Let us start with my biases. I don't particularly like Trump. I believe he is smart, hard working and not owned by the media or moneyed interests. While the media likes to focus on Trump's "outrageous" statements, the other Republican candidates are even worse. The difference is that for the others it is just words to placate voters, the others do not mean what they say, they are merely actors reading from a script.
What I find the most interesting about the Trump campaign is the media and his own parties reaction. I understand their attacks on Trump to retain the status quo for the establishment; but, now they are attacking his supporters. With support from almost half of all Republicans (currently Trump sits at 40% in the polls) there is now a move to discredit his supporters. Watch the short video from Fox.
Fox News - Are Donald Trump's supporters the real deal?
The first question posed by Shepherd Smith is to ask the guest whether or not Trumps supporters are real and if they are the kind of people who "cast real ballots"? He then says that Trumps supporters are the "low information kind of voters" I could not believe that Fox would insult Trump's supporters when they are the same Republicans that watch Fox News. They basically called Trump supporters idiots. What they meant was that Trump supporters are working class and middle class and not the party elite, the wealthy. If I were a Republican Trump supporter I would be angry an the party and at Fox news. This new media call is an attempt to shame people into not voting for Trump, less they themselves look foolish and it will fail miserably. People who support Trump will not continue to answer Fox surveys honestly and they will be shocked when Trump out performs the polls. I studied advanced statistics and survey methodology and I know this to be a fact. In attacking Trump and his supporters the Republican party and the conservative media is going to alienate their grass roots support. This is a fascinating election.
Monday, December 28, 2015
Sunday, December 27, 2015
My Brother and Why Ayn Rand Conservatives Are Idiots.
WARNING: This post has two aspects, one a very philosophical discussion and the other a really funny common sense question.
Logic is a process of connecting thoughts together. It is representational not real. All thought is organized by images. These representations may be with words, numbers, pictures or anything else. In the end they are all emotional responses to defined emotions. Degrees of joy and pain of right and wrong. If you have never read Helen Keller's autobiography you should. She was a woman who had no way to describe or share her experience with others, her reality was hers alone because she had no words, pictures or numbers to use to define her feelings and feelings are the essence of being. I think therefore I am is what Descartes brought to philosophy, Keller proved him wrong. I experience emotional changes, therefore I am is what she proved.
When you have read through the rest of this post, go back and read the first paragraph again and remember, I write without editing and as I think it. This blog is stream of consciousness as written.
Ayn Rand is the author of "Atlas Shrugged", "Fountainhead" and other books. She had a philosophy that said empathy and caring about others is evil. She believed that selfishness was what logic dictated because she did not believe in God or a higher power. Whether or not you or I agree or disagree with her conclusion, it is what she stated throughout her life that she believed. Many people in the Republican party are in love with Ayn Rand as are many who own this country. They are not really conservatives as most conservatives believe in a God and that we are to love and care about one another. Ayn Rand was an Atheist; but, it was more. At a philosophical level she believed she was the only reality she could prove, a Solipsist. In the end the logical problem with proving existence at all is that you have to at least accept that you exist and that it is the only thing you can prove to yourself. After you recognize that, you either believe you are everything that exists or that more than you exists, that is where the idea of God must come into the picture. To believe that you can exist and then die is silly because you have to accept that you are all that exists first. Logically you cannot accept both beliefs. Deep, huh?
That was the deep part, now it gets more common sense. So many "Libertarian" "conservatives" believe that government should only be here to pay for armies and others to protect our sovereignty. They will tell you that is governments most important and only job and even quote the founding fathers; but, they always miss what this country was founded on. It was founded for the common good and that goes beyond boundaries. My brother reminded me of that today and I don't know if he knew he did that when he did that.
My brother is really smart, smarter than he gives himself credit for. I'm really smart; but, differently. I am really good at working with word patterns to understand the world. That is what we test in this world. Whether it is numbers or words or sound, we know how to measure your use of those languages and they are all representational images. My brother understands where people are coming from and we don't have discrete images to represent that. He understands it without a language other than an emotional one. He is much better than I at gauging how much of a person's actions are based on selfishness and how much is based on caring about others. I am autistic and have a much harder time seeing that.
So, where do my brother and Ayn Rand Republicans conflict? My brother asked a simple question that I will paraphrase, why should I fight for this country if I don't have a chance to succeed or do well? Should the jews have fought for Germany's right to put them in concentration camps and kill them merely because they lived in Germany? In the south they call the civil war the war of the states. In the constitution the slaves counted as at least part of a person, would you expect them to have fought for the south to keep slavery because they were citizens of those states? Why would anyone fight to be a slave or have nothing and no chance to live a decent life? That is why government must provide more than border security to have the support of a population.
I will tell you why this country was intentionally sold out, the people that run this place no longer feel they need this place to personally profit. They don't view themselves as Americans, they view themselves as citizens of the world currently residing in this geographic area and no longer needing to be here to profit, that is why they moved the jobs overseas and that is why they are keeping their profits overseas. Free trade agreements are about moving money out of this country and keeping it in the same hands. You cannot legally board a plane with over a certain amount of cash on you; but, you can move billions of dollars to other countries to create new businesses.
The reason this countries economy was intentionally destroyed was so that corporate interests could remove assets from the United States and shift them to other places where they don't have to contribute to others. Germany has the most sophisticated workforce in the world, they make the best products in the world and Apple which claimed Americans couldn't make cell phones didn't send their manufacturing there, they went to China.
Since the economy crashed everybody in this country knows something is wrong with how we are reacting to it as a nation. We paid off the people who crashed the economy, heck, we gave them bonuses for doing it. It was not illegal aliens or Muslims that crashed the stock market, it wasn't terrorists who created and destroyed the housing bubble, it was a very small group of establishment corporate interests. It was the globalist agenda, a world without borders or national taxes of any consequence.
The reason that Donald Trump and Barry Sanders will not be allowed to win the election is simple, they would penalize people for sending jobs overseas and seek to put a stop to avoiding taxes here. Trump is not hated by the party elites because of what he has said in this election. That would be stupid as they had already committed over a hundred million dollars to Jeb Bush and an equally insane amount of money to Hillary Clinton to allow companies to continue to move assets of the United States overseas. Selling dollars and treasury bonds to other countries was merely putting American assets overseas. It is said that China is selling off it's U.S. Treasury bonds; but, to whom? Did they get sold to the Federal Reserve? The answer is no, the Federal Reserve has been decreasing their purchases of US bonds. We are watching a magic trick, it is one of the oldest, it is the three cared Monty.
Logic is a process of connecting thoughts together. It is representational not real. All thought is organized by images. These representations may be with words, numbers, pictures or anything else. In the end they are all emotional responses to defined emotions. Degrees of joy and pain of right and wrong. If you have never read Helen Keller's autobiography you should. She was a woman who had no way to describe or share her experience with others, her reality was hers alone because she had no words, pictures or numbers to use to define her feelings and feelings are the essence of being. I think therefore I am is what Descartes brought to philosophy, Keller proved him wrong. I experience emotional changes, therefore I am is what she proved.
When you have read through the rest of this post, go back and read the first paragraph again and remember, I write without editing and as I think it. This blog is stream of consciousness as written.
Ayn Rand is the author of "Atlas Shrugged", "Fountainhead" and other books. She had a philosophy that said empathy and caring about others is evil. She believed that selfishness was what logic dictated because she did not believe in God or a higher power. Whether or not you or I agree or disagree with her conclusion, it is what she stated throughout her life that she believed. Many people in the Republican party are in love with Ayn Rand as are many who own this country. They are not really conservatives as most conservatives believe in a God and that we are to love and care about one another. Ayn Rand was an Atheist; but, it was more. At a philosophical level she believed she was the only reality she could prove, a Solipsist. In the end the logical problem with proving existence at all is that you have to at least accept that you exist and that it is the only thing you can prove to yourself. After you recognize that, you either believe you are everything that exists or that more than you exists, that is where the idea of God must come into the picture. To believe that you can exist and then die is silly because you have to accept that you are all that exists first. Logically you cannot accept both beliefs. Deep, huh?
That was the deep part, now it gets more common sense. So many "Libertarian" "conservatives" believe that government should only be here to pay for armies and others to protect our sovereignty. They will tell you that is governments most important and only job and even quote the founding fathers; but, they always miss what this country was founded on. It was founded for the common good and that goes beyond boundaries. My brother reminded me of that today and I don't know if he knew he did that when he did that.
My brother is really smart, smarter than he gives himself credit for. I'm really smart; but, differently. I am really good at working with word patterns to understand the world. That is what we test in this world. Whether it is numbers or words or sound, we know how to measure your use of those languages and they are all representational images. My brother understands where people are coming from and we don't have discrete images to represent that. He understands it without a language other than an emotional one. He is much better than I at gauging how much of a person's actions are based on selfishness and how much is based on caring about others. I am autistic and have a much harder time seeing that.
So, where do my brother and Ayn Rand Republicans conflict? My brother asked a simple question that I will paraphrase, why should I fight for this country if I don't have a chance to succeed or do well? Should the jews have fought for Germany's right to put them in concentration camps and kill them merely because they lived in Germany? In the south they call the civil war the war of the states. In the constitution the slaves counted as at least part of a person, would you expect them to have fought for the south to keep slavery because they were citizens of those states? Why would anyone fight to be a slave or have nothing and no chance to live a decent life? That is why government must provide more than border security to have the support of a population.
I will tell you why this country was intentionally sold out, the people that run this place no longer feel they need this place to personally profit. They don't view themselves as Americans, they view themselves as citizens of the world currently residing in this geographic area and no longer needing to be here to profit, that is why they moved the jobs overseas and that is why they are keeping their profits overseas. Free trade agreements are about moving money out of this country and keeping it in the same hands. You cannot legally board a plane with over a certain amount of cash on you; but, you can move billions of dollars to other countries to create new businesses.
The reason this countries economy was intentionally destroyed was so that corporate interests could remove assets from the United States and shift them to other places where they don't have to contribute to others. Germany has the most sophisticated workforce in the world, they make the best products in the world and Apple which claimed Americans couldn't make cell phones didn't send their manufacturing there, they went to China.
Since the economy crashed everybody in this country knows something is wrong with how we are reacting to it as a nation. We paid off the people who crashed the economy, heck, we gave them bonuses for doing it. It was not illegal aliens or Muslims that crashed the stock market, it wasn't terrorists who created and destroyed the housing bubble, it was a very small group of establishment corporate interests. It was the globalist agenda, a world without borders or national taxes of any consequence.
The reason that Donald Trump and Barry Sanders will not be allowed to win the election is simple, they would penalize people for sending jobs overseas and seek to put a stop to avoiding taxes here. Trump is not hated by the party elites because of what he has said in this election. That would be stupid as they had already committed over a hundred million dollars to Jeb Bush and an equally insane amount of money to Hillary Clinton to allow companies to continue to move assets of the United States overseas. Selling dollars and treasury bonds to other countries was merely putting American assets overseas. It is said that China is selling off it's U.S. Treasury bonds; but, to whom? Did they get sold to the Federal Reserve? The answer is no, the Federal Reserve has been decreasing their purchases of US bonds. We are watching a magic trick, it is one of the oldest, it is the three cared Monty.
Saturday, December 26, 2015
Anadarko Chistmas Eve Murder
One of my readers sent me a comment about a murder in Anadarko, Oklahoma on Christmas Eve. I was already aware a news report about it and have been waiting for details to be released. As of now, I still have not seen a report on who was killed. The report states that the police are waiting to release the name until the family has been notified. As a consequence I have not posted the comment yet which includes names. I will post it as soon as I can confirm the names.
The internet is full of bloggers like me and many do not back up their statements with fact or follow traditional rules regarding publishing. My readers know, and a quick look at my posts will show, that I always include links to my resources used. I do this so my readers can investigate for themselves and so that I can defend myself in court if ever sued for what I write. I have written a lot about pension fraud and have named specific individuals and companies (Elliot Broidy and CIM Group most commonly); but, I have always backed my statements up with the reports that I am relying on.
As for posting peoples names. I don't unless I have proof. I have had more than one comment submitted to me that I did not post because accusations were made about people without supplying proof or resources. This does not mean that I doubt people who send comments only that I would never wish to imply someone did or did not do something without knowing and believing it myself to the extent that I would say it in court. It is very important to me that my readers know that if I said it, I believed it at the time and was willing to prove it. Even in regards to pension fraud, I believe things that I cannot prove yet and therefore am waiting to publish certain updates. This will remain my approach.
Here is what I do know right now about what has happened in Anadarko. A few years back a preacher named Pastor Carol Daniels was killed. The case remains unsolved even though the OSBI and local police are still keeping the case open. Anadarko only has about 6,600 people in it and is north of Oklahoma city. This Christmas eve a woman was found dead in a home there and a man was found seriously injured. The names have not been released by the police or the media. In general murders on Christmas Eve or Christmas are family members fighting and having old disagreements or injuries brought up again. Having said that, the comment I received said that one of the people involved was related to someone questioned in the Daniels case. As soon as I can confirm that, I will most likely post the comment.
The internet is full of bloggers like me and many do not back up their statements with fact or follow traditional rules regarding publishing. My readers know, and a quick look at my posts will show, that I always include links to my resources used. I do this so my readers can investigate for themselves and so that I can defend myself in court if ever sued for what I write. I have written a lot about pension fraud and have named specific individuals and companies (Elliot Broidy and CIM Group most commonly); but, I have always backed my statements up with the reports that I am relying on.
As for posting peoples names. I don't unless I have proof. I have had more than one comment submitted to me that I did not post because accusations were made about people without supplying proof or resources. This does not mean that I doubt people who send comments only that I would never wish to imply someone did or did not do something without knowing and believing it myself to the extent that I would say it in court. It is very important to me that my readers know that if I said it, I believed it at the time and was willing to prove it. Even in regards to pension fraud, I believe things that I cannot prove yet and therefore am waiting to publish certain updates. This will remain my approach.
Here is what I do know right now about what has happened in Anadarko. A few years back a preacher named Pastor Carol Daniels was killed. The case remains unsolved even though the OSBI and local police are still keeping the case open. Anadarko only has about 6,600 people in it and is north of Oklahoma city. This Christmas eve a woman was found dead in a home there and a man was found seriously injured. The names have not been released by the police or the media. In general murders on Christmas Eve or Christmas are family members fighting and having old disagreements or injuries brought up again. Having said that, the comment I received said that one of the people involved was related to someone questioned in the Daniels case. As soon as I can confirm that, I will most likely post the comment.
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
12-23-2015 Just Some News
Yahoo - CNBC - Tim Cook gets support in his salvo against taxes. Simply put, the Apple CEO said he was not going to bring the billions in money sitting overseas back to the United States because they don't want to pay taxes on it.
Market Watch - Tim Cook says this is the real reason Apple products are made in China. Once again the Apple CEO claims that American workers are not skilled enough to make Apple products. Yet the real reason is in the first article, it is to dodge taxes.
Yahoo - Frustrated Don Lemon Cuts Segment Short After Guest's Bill Clinton Comments. A guest on one of the talking head shows was asked about Donald Trump use of terms when talking about certain women. The guest pointed out that Bill Clinton used Monica Lewinsky like furniture while he was president. The interviewer then ended the interview. I have to agree with the guest. It is a little hypocritical for Hillary Clinton to make allegations about Trump's attitude towards women considering how her husband treated women and her acceptance of it.
Market Watch - Tim Cook says this is the real reason Apple products are made in China. Once again the Apple CEO claims that American workers are not skilled enough to make Apple products. Yet the real reason is in the first article, it is to dodge taxes.
Yahoo - Frustrated Don Lemon Cuts Segment Short After Guest's Bill Clinton Comments. A guest on one of the talking head shows was asked about Donald Trump use of terms when talking about certain women. The guest pointed out that Bill Clinton used Monica Lewinsky like furniture while he was president. The interviewer then ended the interview. I have to agree with the guest. It is a little hypocritical for Hillary Clinton to make allegations about Trump's attitude towards women considering how her husband treated women and her acceptance of it.
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Juliet Evancho
There is a young singer who I really enjoy named Jackie Evancho, this post is not about her. I heard her by accident while watching videos on YouTube and discovering that she had competed on "America's Got Talent". I want to point out that she was not discovered on that TV show as she had already performed with a famous musician in Las Vegas. She was really discovered in Massachusetts originally by a local talent show and then by David Foster a multi-Grammy winning musician and producer. I should also point out that her first album was produced by Mr. Foster and went Platinum. I think she was 11 at the time.
As for my musical tastes. My favorite music is a certain type of Jazz or big band music. My second favorite type of music is classic rock. My third is for certain types of Country and Western. In addition to all that, I like Opera singers. I blame my mother who listened to all types of music. I do not have the same appreciation she did for Marching Bands; but, appreciate her exposing me to all types of music and never judging my choices. My favorite songs by Miss Evancho are the Opera ones.
Anyways, I saw Miss Evancho recently in Santa Barbara. I planned to post on it; but, sometimes I wait before I post on items. I went to Santa Barbara with a friend and we had a wonderful time and even though he is not a Opera fan, he still enjoyed the show. In the course of our discussing the show afterwards I said I would like to see her again in a few years to see how she was progressing and improving. I think as she grows she will expand her abilities as her body grows. She is only 15 at the moment. This post is still not about her, you just need the background to understand where I am coming from. There is a twist coming soon. Please be patient with my approach.
My friend disagreed with me at first about her improving. He said in his opinion she had perfect pitch and that you either have that or do not. I do not understand perfect pitch nor can I tell you when someone has it. In either case. eventually he conceded that growth might contribute to her having a greater range. In the show she sang a song called Nessun Dorma. She sang it exquisitely and hit a note at the end that was amazing. I did not record the show as that is prohibited. I did however find a video of her singing it in another recent live performance and am providing a link to it.
YouTube - Jackie Evancho - Nessun Dorma - Lancaster, KY - 11-21-15.
I am not a superfan of anyone, I do not get intensely interested in celebrity. I do however remember things and have seen Miss Evancho in a number of interviews. I know that she loves animals. I also know that her family is fairly conservative and she still has chores. I know that when she travels for concerts she brings at least one parent and one sibling. He oldest sibling is her brother. There are some videos out there of him singing on stage with her. My observation is that he is protective of his sister and that she loves him. I have been watching these videos and interviews for at least 3 years. While looking for a video from the show I had watched in Santa Barbara I found something else. I found out that her brother had come out as transgendered this year. I must say that I was surprised.
YouTube - Jackie Evancho & Juliet Evancho - Interview.
I think it is only fair to my readers that I express my biases. I have no problem with homosexuals. I think I have made that clear in the past. I do have issues with trans genders. To say I do not would be to lie to my readers and that is not going to happen. I don't have a need to tell others what they can or cannot do unless they are intentionally hurting others for that purpose. I don't care about Bruce or Caitlyn Jenner. I am not interested in the story. My issue is with changing one's body to attempt to make it something that it is not naturally. That is a lot of my arguing against Transhumanism. I think it is better that we accept ourselves and work with what we have. I should point out that just about all of the homosexuals I know are uncomfortable around trans-genders.
This post is about lines, lines that we cross or do not and lines that we believe others have a right to cross. That is the essence of personal freedom. I personally do not believe in tattoos. I believe in dentures to replace teeth that we have lost and I believe that women who have lost breasts to cancer should be able to restore their bodies to where they were. I do not believe in eliminating healthy appendages for psychological reasons and know that it rarely turns out well as no matter where you go, there you are. You remain you, scars and all. That is my personal feeling and belief. I don't want to be allowed to enforce it on others. I believe in freedom and self direction and personal choice. I detest abortion; but, would not condemn women or doctors to jail for having them. I don't own someone else's soul or body. I leave it to God to judge souls, not me.
How does one take the position that the government cannot tax you to pay to help your fellow citizens; but, still believe that they have the right to outlaw abortion or Marijuana or Gay Marriage. How is that consistent. How do you justify controlling others lives but not believing you can also be controlled? Everyone likes the easy questions and nobody likes the really tough questions. The tough questions make us dissect where two easy answers divert as things get more complex.
I don't believe in abortion and I don't believe in slavery. My choice between the two is to not try and prohibit people from controlling their own body and letting them be accountable for what they do with it. If there is no God, there is nothing to be held accountable for as dead is dead. If you do not believe in God, why would you believe in any rules other than personal choices. I believe in God and if you believe in God then he doesn't need your help to talk to people or decide what is allowed. I believe in free choice until someone tries to impose their choice on my personal choice. I believe others have the same right.
There is a condition called Hermaphrodite. That is when one is born with both genitalia. When one is born as both a man and a woman. I didn't know that frequently when they are born the parents are asked which they want their child to be and that their sex change is done at that time, at birth or near birth. My guess is that people usually choose for their children to become males. That is a sex change operation performed on minors. Would you want your child to be born a hermaphrodite or would you choose for them? What if you chose wrong? Truth is either choice is wrong. I would let them be both and not change what God allowed them to be at birth. Did you know that many trans-genders were born hermaphrodites who had their parents choose which parts remained after they were born? I did not know that for the longest time because it is not often discussed. I do not know the story surrounding Juliet Evancho. This is not about her. It is about unpleasant questions regarding who we are and the choices we allowed to make for ourselves.
UPDATE:
I wrote this post about 7 months ago. I didn't really think much about it at the time, I had just gotten back from Santa Barbara and discovered that her brother had decided to go public with his choice about who he was. I wanted to use what I had learned to talk to others about acceptance of others and not worrying about being other people's god, decider, judge. Here is the point, I probably would not have mentioned this post again except, it turned out to be popular. The searches that led people here were not for Jackie Evancho, they were for "Juliet Evancho Rocks". In fact, on Google I came up the tenth search for those terms. I didn't know that, I am always surprised when I show up on the search engines.
I guess it is possible that Miss Juliet Evancho has read this post. I don't know what to say. I would start by saying to her and anyone else that it wasn't personal or about her and hope it was respectful of other peoples choices, I think it was. I am a retired analyst and based on the number of hits this post received I have to assume it was people outside of the Evanho family that searched "Juliet Evancho Rocks". I doubt she would have googled those words. I think the people who read this post are probably feeling a kinship with her. That word "rocks" makes me think that. I think it is read by people seeking support for how they fee and I want to address that.
I don't know who will read this in the future. The post has had no comments, only more views than normal. Let me be clear, you can comment anonymously and as long as you are civil and do not use cuss words, I will probably post your comment. My guess is that people who searched :Juliet Evancho Rocks" may feel the same as she did and are seeking the same freedom.
Here is the real fun. Whoever reads this in the future because they searched "Juliet Evancho Rocks" are probably looking for someone to agree with them or someone to be mad at. I am both of those things. I don't agree with changing yourself to fit others views on gender and I do believe others have the "right" to self will and self determination. A paradox to be sure if you fail to understand the real issue, self determination. If you choose to risk your life to climb mount Everest and the welfare of your family if you die, you are a jerk; but, you have that right. Juliet only puts her own self to risk, her family can choose to go on the ride or not (my understanding is that they support her).
As for my musical tastes. My favorite music is a certain type of Jazz or big band music. My second favorite type of music is classic rock. My third is for certain types of Country and Western. In addition to all that, I like Opera singers. I blame my mother who listened to all types of music. I do not have the same appreciation she did for Marching Bands; but, appreciate her exposing me to all types of music and never judging my choices. My favorite songs by Miss Evancho are the Opera ones.
Anyways, I saw Miss Evancho recently in Santa Barbara. I planned to post on it; but, sometimes I wait before I post on items. I went to Santa Barbara with a friend and we had a wonderful time and even though he is not a Opera fan, he still enjoyed the show. In the course of our discussing the show afterwards I said I would like to see her again in a few years to see how she was progressing and improving. I think as she grows she will expand her abilities as her body grows. She is only 15 at the moment. This post is still not about her, you just need the background to understand where I am coming from. There is a twist coming soon. Please be patient with my approach.
My friend disagreed with me at first about her improving. He said in his opinion she had perfect pitch and that you either have that or do not. I do not understand perfect pitch nor can I tell you when someone has it. In either case. eventually he conceded that growth might contribute to her having a greater range. In the show she sang a song called Nessun Dorma. She sang it exquisitely and hit a note at the end that was amazing. I did not record the show as that is prohibited. I did however find a video of her singing it in another recent live performance and am providing a link to it.
YouTube - Jackie Evancho - Nessun Dorma - Lancaster, KY - 11-21-15.
I am not a superfan of anyone, I do not get intensely interested in celebrity. I do however remember things and have seen Miss Evancho in a number of interviews. I know that she loves animals. I also know that her family is fairly conservative and she still has chores. I know that when she travels for concerts she brings at least one parent and one sibling. He oldest sibling is her brother. There are some videos out there of him singing on stage with her. My observation is that he is protective of his sister and that she loves him. I have been watching these videos and interviews for at least 3 years. While looking for a video from the show I had watched in Santa Barbara I found something else. I found out that her brother had come out as transgendered this year. I must say that I was surprised.
YouTube - Jackie Evancho & Juliet Evancho - Interview.
I think it is only fair to my readers that I express my biases. I have no problem with homosexuals. I think I have made that clear in the past. I do have issues with trans genders. To say I do not would be to lie to my readers and that is not going to happen. I don't have a need to tell others what they can or cannot do unless they are intentionally hurting others for that purpose. I don't care about Bruce or Caitlyn Jenner. I am not interested in the story. My issue is with changing one's body to attempt to make it something that it is not naturally. That is a lot of my arguing against Transhumanism. I think it is better that we accept ourselves and work with what we have. I should point out that just about all of the homosexuals I know are uncomfortable around trans-genders.
This post is about lines, lines that we cross or do not and lines that we believe others have a right to cross. That is the essence of personal freedom. I personally do not believe in tattoos. I believe in dentures to replace teeth that we have lost and I believe that women who have lost breasts to cancer should be able to restore their bodies to where they were. I do not believe in eliminating healthy appendages for psychological reasons and know that it rarely turns out well as no matter where you go, there you are. You remain you, scars and all. That is my personal feeling and belief. I don't want to be allowed to enforce it on others. I believe in freedom and self direction and personal choice. I detest abortion; but, would not condemn women or doctors to jail for having them. I don't own someone else's soul or body. I leave it to God to judge souls, not me.
How does one take the position that the government cannot tax you to pay to help your fellow citizens; but, still believe that they have the right to outlaw abortion or Marijuana or Gay Marriage. How is that consistent. How do you justify controlling others lives but not believing you can also be controlled? Everyone likes the easy questions and nobody likes the really tough questions. The tough questions make us dissect where two easy answers divert as things get more complex.
I don't believe in abortion and I don't believe in slavery. My choice between the two is to not try and prohibit people from controlling their own body and letting them be accountable for what they do with it. If there is no God, there is nothing to be held accountable for as dead is dead. If you do not believe in God, why would you believe in any rules other than personal choices. I believe in God and if you believe in God then he doesn't need your help to talk to people or decide what is allowed. I believe in free choice until someone tries to impose their choice on my personal choice. I believe others have the same right.
There is a condition called Hermaphrodite. That is when one is born with both genitalia. When one is born as both a man and a woman. I didn't know that frequently when they are born the parents are asked which they want their child to be and that their sex change is done at that time, at birth or near birth. My guess is that people usually choose for their children to become males. That is a sex change operation performed on minors. Would you want your child to be born a hermaphrodite or would you choose for them? What if you chose wrong? Truth is either choice is wrong. I would let them be both and not change what God allowed them to be at birth. Did you know that many trans-genders were born hermaphrodites who had their parents choose which parts remained after they were born? I did not know that for the longest time because it is not often discussed. I do not know the story surrounding Juliet Evancho. This is not about her. It is about unpleasant questions regarding who we are and the choices we allowed to make for ourselves.
UPDATE:
I wrote this post about 7 months ago. I didn't really think much about it at the time, I had just gotten back from Santa Barbara and discovered that her brother had decided to go public with his choice about who he was. I wanted to use what I had learned to talk to others about acceptance of others and not worrying about being other people's god, decider, judge. Here is the point, I probably would not have mentioned this post again except, it turned out to be popular. The searches that led people here were not for Jackie Evancho, they were for "Juliet Evancho Rocks". In fact, on Google I came up the tenth search for those terms. I didn't know that, I am always surprised when I show up on the search engines.
I guess it is possible that Miss Juliet Evancho has read this post. I don't know what to say. I would start by saying to her and anyone else that it wasn't personal or about her and hope it was respectful of other peoples choices, I think it was. I am a retired analyst and based on the number of hits this post received I have to assume it was people outside of the Evanho family that searched "Juliet Evancho Rocks". I doubt she would have googled those words. I think the people who read this post are probably feeling a kinship with her. That word "rocks" makes me think that. I think it is read by people seeking support for how they fee and I want to address that.
I don't know who will read this in the future. The post has had no comments, only more views than normal. Let me be clear, you can comment anonymously and as long as you are civil and do not use cuss words, I will probably post your comment. My guess is that people who searched :Juliet Evancho Rocks" may feel the same as she did and are seeking the same freedom.
Here is the real fun. Whoever reads this in the future because they searched "Juliet Evancho Rocks" are probably looking for someone to agree with them or someone to be mad at. I am both of those things. I don't agree with changing yourself to fit others views on gender and I do believe others have the "right" to self will and self determination. A paradox to be sure if you fail to understand the real issue, self determination. If you choose to risk your life to climb mount Everest and the welfare of your family if you die, you are a jerk; but, you have that right. Juliet only puts her own self to risk, her family can choose to go on the ride or not (my understanding is that they support her).
Sunday, December 20, 2015
12-20-2015 Pastor Carol Daniels Searches
I have noticed a considerable increase in searches on Pastor Carol Daniels. If someone has recent information I would appreciate it if they would send me a comment and tell me what it is. I did a search for her and found nothing new; but, if it is a news article from Oklahoma it may not be searchable and I do not have ready access to their news station reports or their newspapers.
Manufactured Reality in Politics
Fox News - Fox News Poll: Cruz, Trump ahead in Iowa, Clinton holds caucus lead. Caucuses are voted on by staunch party members. Primaries are voted on by the people who choose to vote for one party or another. They are popular votes by supporters of the party. There are four party outsiders in the Republican party running for President, Trump, Cruz, Paul and Carson. Trump and Cruz and Trump and Carson together have much more than half of the support of the party members. Each presents the party establishment with a problem. Trump would always do what he wanted and would not allow the establishment to force it's will on him. Paul would likewise follow his own Libertarian beliefs. Carson is black and many Republicans would not vote for him for that reason alone; but, he also inexperienced. We do have a black president so clearly people are willing to vote for a black man in this day and age; but, a large number of Republicans believe Obama is not American and that he is the most evil person ever elected. Some of that hatred is distrust of blacks by a group within the conservatives.
Now we come to Cruz. Cruz has regularly annoyed the party establishment; but, he has also voted with them. He is to the right of most of his Republican congressmen. As between the four the party establishment would prefer Cruz. Now lets think about this. If I were advising the party establishment, I would want Cruz to win the Iowa caucus, if he wins they will then immediately be reports about how Trump cannot win a vote and why people should support Cruz as electable. Bush will come in third or fourth. It is believed that if Trump goes down in the polls he will pull out rather than suffer defeat, I don't assume that. It is also believed that many of the remaining candidates will leave if they cannot make a significant showing in the first few elections.
Yahoo - The Fiscal Times - How Many More Jobs Do We Need to Reach Full Recovery? It is believed that we need to create 6.4 million jobs to get back to where we were before the recession. Of the jobs that exist now, a third are part time, temporary of freelance. The employment situation is grim for the young. If we do not fight globalism and return jobs to this country our children are doomed to a future with few good opportunities.
Huffington Post - Jeb Is the Republicans' Only Chance Against Hillary. I want to start by asking why a liberal publication would say Jeb Bush is the only hope for the Republican party. I like this paragraph from the article:
"The Republican electorate is the problem, not the candidates. The candidates are trapped in a world that is dominated by anger and alienation, not a contest of ideas or even personalities. Jeb is the perfect case. He sounds genuine and reasonable. He can attract voters outside the base. He performed well. He may well be the Republicans only hope against Hillary. And he sits at 6%."
The New York Times - Donald Trump Campaign Lags in Mobilizing Iowa Caucus Voters. This article contains a lot of information about how the Iowa caucus works and it is truly bizarre to those of us used to voting for candidates directly. You should read it, it will effect who the next President is.
Now we come to Cruz. Cruz has regularly annoyed the party establishment; but, he has also voted with them. He is to the right of most of his Republican congressmen. As between the four the party establishment would prefer Cruz. Now lets think about this. If I were advising the party establishment, I would want Cruz to win the Iowa caucus, if he wins they will then immediately be reports about how Trump cannot win a vote and why people should support Cruz as electable. Bush will come in third or fourth. It is believed that if Trump goes down in the polls he will pull out rather than suffer defeat, I don't assume that. It is also believed that many of the remaining candidates will leave if they cannot make a significant showing in the first few elections.
Yahoo - The Fiscal Times - How Many More Jobs Do We Need to Reach Full Recovery? It is believed that we need to create 6.4 million jobs to get back to where we were before the recession. Of the jobs that exist now, a third are part time, temporary of freelance. The employment situation is grim for the young. If we do not fight globalism and return jobs to this country our children are doomed to a future with few good opportunities.
Huffington Post - Jeb Is the Republicans' Only Chance Against Hillary. I want to start by asking why a liberal publication would say Jeb Bush is the only hope for the Republican party. I like this paragraph from the article:
"The Republican electorate is the problem, not the candidates. The candidates are trapped in a world that is dominated by anger and alienation, not a contest of ideas or even personalities. Jeb is the perfect case. He sounds genuine and reasonable. He can attract voters outside the base. He performed well. He may well be the Republicans only hope against Hillary. And he sits at 6%."
The New York Times - Donald Trump Campaign Lags in Mobilizing Iowa Caucus Voters. This article contains a lot of information about how the Iowa caucus works and it is truly bizarre to those of us used to voting for candidates directly. You should read it, it will effect who the next President is.
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
Fox News Lied to You.
Huffington Post - Reuters - FBI Director: No Evidence California Shooters Were Part Of Cell.
Since a day or two after the San Bernardino shootings Fox News and others have reported that the woman involved in the shootings had posted Jihadist rhetoric on social media. It was claimed that this information came from a unnamed source. Well according to the Director of the FBI it never happened. In fact, the FBI has not stated that they know the reason behind the shootings and this raises a lot of issues.
Lets begin with this, why didn't Fox verify what they were publishing? Why were they so quick to jump to the conclusion that they did? Why did Fox ignore the obvious? A husband and wife walked into the husbands work and began shooting people. That is by definition workplace violence. It could have been religiously motivated; but, we don't know that.
Since a day or two after the San Bernardino shootings Fox News and others have reported that the woman involved in the shootings had posted Jihadist rhetoric on social media. It was claimed that this information came from a unnamed source. Well according to the Director of the FBI it never happened. In fact, the FBI has not stated that they know the reason behind the shootings and this raises a lot of issues.
Lets begin with this, why didn't Fox verify what they were publishing? Why were they so quick to jump to the conclusion that they did? Why did Fox ignore the obvious? A husband and wife walked into the husbands work and began shooting people. That is by definition workplace violence. It could have been religiously motivated; but, we don't know that.
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
Trump Versus the Republican Establishment. Trump 7 - Establishment 0.
New York Magazine - Republican Billionaires Just Can’t Seem to Buy This Election. An amusing article talking about all the billionaires backing the establishment candidates. It is interesting that the biggest Cruz donor is a hedge fund manager. Maybe that is why the other Republican candidates failed to support call for hedge fund managers to pay the same taxes as the rest of us. The end of the article talks about how all of Jeb Bushes big contributors held a meeting to complain that he wasn't getting any popular support even after they spend tens of millions. I bet you some of them were involved in the meeting to discuss forcing a brokered election. Ben Carson knows something that the others don't, if the election is brokered it will be a Jeb Bush nomination, not Carson and definitely not Cruz. Rand Paul certainly does not even win in a brokered election.
YouTube - Glenn Beck Reveals a Story He Hasn't Been Able to Share for Over a Year - GOP 'COUP' STORY. I want to start by saying I think Glenn Beck says some really stupid stuff and holds political far right beliefs that I don't agree with. Having said that, I think he believes in what he says and is a full blown Libertarian and Tea Party supporter. His story is about how the Republican establishment infiltrated and attempted to co-op the Freedom Works organization. They dumped all the Libertarian Republicans when it was getting more support within the Republican party. The video is from over two years ago; but, what he is discussing is what is going on between the establishment Republicans and Donald Trump.
Huffington Post - The end is nigh for Donald Trump. That is according to Jeb Bush at a meeting with his donors in November. In fact, Jeb specifically told people that Trump would be in Decline by December 15th, the date of the next Republican debate; but, Bush said this in November when Trump was still going up in the polls. Why did he pick the December 15th date? My guess, he knew that the establishment was going to all go after Trump at the same time as they have for the past month and he probably knew it would be an organized effort.
Huffington Post - Why You Should Stop Freaking Out About The New Trump Poll. Basically another article that saying the polls don't mean anything when it comes to Trump. Everytime a poll says Trump is not in front the media makes a big deal about it and talks about Trump being in decline and everytime another poll shows his numbers staying or increasing it is discussed as not real. Trump has been leading the race since the start and has just increased his lead to 41% with Bush only at 3%. I guess Bush was wrong when he said Trump would be in decline by the 15th because tomorrow is the 15th and the last debate.
December 15, 2015 there is going to be another Republican debate and it will be the last one for this year. You might think all of the other candidates might attack Trump and they may; but, that would be really dangerous as if anyone is going to get more support than Trump they will need his supporters. It should also be noted that the more Trump is attacked, the more his support grows. People in the Republican believe this is their only chance to elect somebody who is not bought and paid for and the party insiders are scared almost to the point of hysteria. I do hope all my readers watch the debate, it will be fascinating and tell you a lot about how this race is going to go.
In any other year the party elite would be telling everyone with less than 5% support to leave and throw their support behind the leading candidate. They don't want anyone to leave because they fear the votes will go to Trump or at least a portion of them and further put him up in the polls. What happens after Iowa and New Hampshire when certain candidates practically no votes? How do they stay in the election. What justification do they use?
Now lets talk about the Iowa Caucus. It is not a vote, it is a caucus and only the party elect get to vote. Caucuses are like the electoral college, they are not a popular vote. If someone other than Trump is going to last, they will need to make a good showing in Iowa. If Trump wins the caucus, the game is over for any establishment candidate. I would not be surprised if Trump did not outright win the caucus because it is insiders. I expect him to come in a strong second or win and I expect Bush to do better than his poll number for the same reason. If Trump does not win in Iowa it will further annoy Republicans who want their vote and their opinion to matter to the party and show how the party does not represent them. After Iowa comes New Hampshire, the first real primary. The thing to look for in that election is who comes out to vote for whom. What happens if the Republican party gains more voters because Trump is running? How does the party then continue to try and undermine him and not further turn off voters? This is the most interesting election in my lifetime. Nationally it is not the most important in my life; but, it is the most important in the life of the Republican party.
UPDATE:
I want to double down on something I already posted. Iowa is not representative of Republicans, it is representative of the Republican establishment. Caucuses are where someone votes for you even when you don't get to tell them how you want them to vote. A caucus represents a minority of their own party, the "true believers", the party elite. It is sort of like the Oscars, you have to be in the industry to vote for someone to get an Academy Award. It is not a popular vote, it is a class based vote.
Fox - With rise in polls, Cruz becomes potential Trump target in Tuesday's GOP debate.
YouTube - Glenn Beck Reveals a Story He Hasn't Been Able to Share for Over a Year - GOP 'COUP' STORY. I want to start by saying I think Glenn Beck says some really stupid stuff and holds political far right beliefs that I don't agree with. Having said that, I think he believes in what he says and is a full blown Libertarian and Tea Party supporter. His story is about how the Republican establishment infiltrated and attempted to co-op the Freedom Works organization. They dumped all the Libertarian Republicans when it was getting more support within the Republican party. The video is from over two years ago; but, what he is discussing is what is going on between the establishment Republicans and Donald Trump.
Huffington Post - The end is nigh for Donald Trump. That is according to Jeb Bush at a meeting with his donors in November. In fact, Jeb specifically told people that Trump would be in Decline by December 15th, the date of the next Republican debate; but, Bush said this in November when Trump was still going up in the polls. Why did he pick the December 15th date? My guess, he knew that the establishment was going to all go after Trump at the same time as they have for the past month and he probably knew it would be an organized effort.
Huffington Post - Why You Should Stop Freaking Out About The New Trump Poll. Basically another article that saying the polls don't mean anything when it comes to Trump. Everytime a poll says Trump is not in front the media makes a big deal about it and talks about Trump being in decline and everytime another poll shows his numbers staying or increasing it is discussed as not real. Trump has been leading the race since the start and has just increased his lead to 41% with Bush only at 3%. I guess Bush was wrong when he said Trump would be in decline by the 15th because tomorrow is the 15th and the last debate.
December 15, 2015 there is going to be another Republican debate and it will be the last one for this year. You might think all of the other candidates might attack Trump and they may; but, that would be really dangerous as if anyone is going to get more support than Trump they will need his supporters. It should also be noted that the more Trump is attacked, the more his support grows. People in the Republican believe this is their only chance to elect somebody who is not bought and paid for and the party insiders are scared almost to the point of hysteria. I do hope all my readers watch the debate, it will be fascinating and tell you a lot about how this race is going to go.
In any other year the party elite would be telling everyone with less than 5% support to leave and throw their support behind the leading candidate. They don't want anyone to leave because they fear the votes will go to Trump or at least a portion of them and further put him up in the polls. What happens after Iowa and New Hampshire when certain candidates practically no votes? How do they stay in the election. What justification do they use?
Now lets talk about the Iowa Caucus. It is not a vote, it is a caucus and only the party elect get to vote. Caucuses are like the electoral college, they are not a popular vote. If someone other than Trump is going to last, they will need to make a good showing in Iowa. If Trump wins the caucus, the game is over for any establishment candidate. I would not be surprised if Trump did not outright win the caucus because it is insiders. I expect him to come in a strong second or win and I expect Bush to do better than his poll number for the same reason. If Trump does not win in Iowa it will further annoy Republicans who want their vote and their opinion to matter to the party and show how the party does not represent them. After Iowa comes New Hampshire, the first real primary. The thing to look for in that election is who comes out to vote for whom. What happens if the Republican party gains more voters because Trump is running? How does the party then continue to try and undermine him and not further turn off voters? This is the most interesting election in my lifetime. Nationally it is not the most important in my life; but, it is the most important in the life of the Republican party.
UPDATE:
I want to double down on something I already posted. Iowa is not representative of Republicans, it is representative of the Republican establishment. Caucuses are where someone votes for you even when you don't get to tell them how you want them to vote. A caucus represents a minority of their own party, the "true believers", the party elite. It is sort of like the Oscars, you have to be in the industry to vote for someone to get an Academy Award. It is not a popular vote, it is a class based vote.
Fox - With rise in polls, Cruz becomes potential Trump target in Tuesday's GOP debate.
Friday, December 11, 2015
Ben Carson Stands Up For Voters Rather Than Party
Yahoo - Business Insider - Ben Carson blows up and threatens to leave GOP over report of potential anti-Trump effort by party leaders. Most headlines just stated that Carson threatened to run as an Third Party candidate; but, that is not the story. Here is a quote from the article, "The retired neurosurgeon even threatened to leave the GOP, referencing front-runner Donald Trump’s own threats to run as an independent. “If this was the beginning of a plan to subvert the will of the voters and replace it with the will of the political elite, I assure you Donald Trump will not be the only one leaving the party,” Carson said."
Ben Carson is a pretty low key person and fairly soft spoken. These are admirable qualities in anyone and probably absolutely necessary in a brain surgeon. So what got Carson so upset? What upset him was the same thing I just wrote about yesterday, the idea that the Republican party wants to cheat the election and ignore the voters. A group of Republican insiders (or political elite) got together to discuss how they would avoid a Trump nomination. It was reported on in the papers as an anti-Trump movement and the party did not deny it until now. Now that Carson has threatened to leave the party, the party spokespeople are saying it was nothing, just a dinner where there was cocktail talk. That is a lie.
This election is not about whether you like Trump or not. This election is about whether your vote counts or not. I liked what Jesse Ventura said, he said that he would be happy to run with Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump because they are both shaking up the parties. I have also said and written that I would support either just to make the parties listen to the people again. If Sanders wins the vote of the Democrats and Hillary Clinton is the nominee anyways, it will be the death of the Democratic party and if Trump wins the elections and someone else is the nominee, it will be the death of the Republican party.
Ben Carson is a pretty low key person and fairly soft spoken. These are admirable qualities in anyone and probably absolutely necessary in a brain surgeon. So what got Carson so upset? What upset him was the same thing I just wrote about yesterday, the idea that the Republican party wants to cheat the election and ignore the voters. A group of Republican insiders (or political elite) got together to discuss how they would avoid a Trump nomination. It was reported on in the papers as an anti-Trump movement and the party did not deny it until now. Now that Carson has threatened to leave the party, the party spokespeople are saying it was nothing, just a dinner where there was cocktail talk. That is a lie.
This election is not about whether you like Trump or not. This election is about whether your vote counts or not. I liked what Jesse Ventura said, he said that he would be happy to run with Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump because they are both shaking up the parties. I have also said and written that I would support either just to make the parties listen to the people again. If Sanders wins the vote of the Democrats and Hillary Clinton is the nominee anyways, it will be the death of the Democratic party and if Trump wins the elections and someone else is the nominee, it will be the death of the Republican party.
More Trump and More News
The Washington Free Beacon - Congress to Consider Easing Passage into U.S. for Immigrants. It is reported that this legislation is a direct response to Trumps comments. What does this say about our congressmen? We have the right to determine who moves here and that right should not be voted down just to spite Donald Trump. The reaction is more childish than Trumps statements.
FiveThirtyEightEconomics - Most Americans Aren’t Middle Class Anymore. What I find amusing is that while giving the statistics that prove the headline, the writer goes on to say that this is a good thing. What? There are more poor and more rich, how is this a good thing? Another article by a whigged out right winger who despises Americans making a decent salary.
Yahoo - FP - The Man Who Would Destroy the Republican Party. You should read the article, it is one of the most alarmist I have read yet. According to the writer, if Trump wins as the parties candidate the Republican party will be destroyed, the nation will implode and we will all die. This is the definition of desperate. Somewhere in the article they actually accuse him of being a "nationalist". Wait, he is more concerned about this country then other countries. Hmmm, why would that be a problem for a President?
Yahoo - It’s either Trump or the Republican Party. Not both. Again, more alarmists. Why are they more concerned about the party than the people they are supposed to represent? If Republicans want Trump than that is what they want.
Yahoo - Business Insider - GOP power brokers are reportedly preparing for an 11th-hour floor fight to defeat Donald Trump. There it is. If Trump wins the votes of Republicans in the primaries then the party will find a way to not let him be declared their winner. Screw the democratic process, who cares what the elections say, lets ignore all of that and have a few establishment insiders pick the candidate for all of us. Let me tell you something, there is nothing in the Constitution that says we have to hold primary elections for parties on the government dime. It is even more questionable using tax money to hold primaries when the electorate is ignored anyways. We should defund the primaries, if political parties want to select their candidates then they don't need or deserve tax money to do it.
The Washington Post - GOP preparing for contested convention. This is in essence the way the Republican elites plan on stealing the election from Trump even if he wins more votes than any other candidate in their party.
Washington Free Beacon - The Party Divides - Column: A Trump nomination would be the end of the GOP as we know it. Come on, you love reading the hysteria and insanity from these links. WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE PRIMARY YET! Why so much fear and hysteria so early on? Why are Republican insiders so afraid that Trump could win anything, he has never run for office before and has never had one person vote for him for anything. You know what scares them. It is that they will not be able to convince Republicans to not vote for him. A little story. When I was an undergraduate my degree was meant to be in Political Science (yes, I also qualified for degrees in Psychology and Sociology but they were not declared majors, just a hobby). In order to get my degree I had to take math classes. I decided to take classes in statistics. I ended up taking advanced statistics and more. I liked the teacher and found the work interesting. I actually learned to use a mainframe computer because of my statistics classes. My Professor worked for a major city and was in charge of their surveys. He actually offered me a job doing statistics for the City, I went to Law School instead; but, it was quite a compliment and he was a great guy. Wow, I need a moment.
You know, the Pimpernel has done a lot of dumb things in his life and I just recognized another one. I went to college so I could work in government and TURNED DOWN a job to work in government right out of college while I was still in college. Ahhhhhh. You know why I turned it down? I wanted to go to Law School, this is stupid because I never wanted to practice law and only wanted it to help me in government.
Anyways, I understood how statistics worked and how to do real surveys, most surveys you read about are garbage and don't actually qualify as valid. There are actually rules for taking valid surveys and verifying their accuracy. It is only because the media is more interested in shaping your opinion than accepting it that they don't use valid surveys. I don't want to get into the finer points of statistics so let me move on. The reality is that every candidate and every party has a statistician constantly doing surveys for them and they never release their own survey information. Why would anyone pay for a survey to show they were not going to win and had no support and then present it to the public? All the parties and candidates also hold focus groups. A focus group is where you take a selection of people with a particular interest and question them on why they have that interest. Through surveys and focus groups the Republican party and the other candidates believe his supporters are going to stick with him and vote for him. The Republican party has given up on the idea that they can prevent Trump from being supported by the republican voters.
Now lets play a game. Lets say that Trump wins the Republican party nomination and becomes President. How does a Republican congressman vote against his policies and get re-elected? How does a Republican congress vote against everything a Republican President proposes? LOL. A Trump win would force the Republicans to work with Democrats or support everything he wants to do. . LMAO.
FiveThirtyEightEconomics - Most Americans Aren’t Middle Class Anymore. What I find amusing is that while giving the statistics that prove the headline, the writer goes on to say that this is a good thing. What? There are more poor and more rich, how is this a good thing? Another article by a whigged out right winger who despises Americans making a decent salary.
Yahoo - FP - The Man Who Would Destroy the Republican Party. You should read the article, it is one of the most alarmist I have read yet. According to the writer, if Trump wins as the parties candidate the Republican party will be destroyed, the nation will implode and we will all die. This is the definition of desperate. Somewhere in the article they actually accuse him of being a "nationalist". Wait, he is more concerned about this country then other countries. Hmmm, why would that be a problem for a President?
Yahoo - It’s either Trump or the Republican Party. Not both. Again, more alarmists. Why are they more concerned about the party than the people they are supposed to represent? If Republicans want Trump than that is what they want.
Yahoo - Business Insider - GOP power brokers are reportedly preparing for an 11th-hour floor fight to defeat Donald Trump. There it is. If Trump wins the votes of Republicans in the primaries then the party will find a way to not let him be declared their winner. Screw the democratic process, who cares what the elections say, lets ignore all of that and have a few establishment insiders pick the candidate for all of us. Let me tell you something, there is nothing in the Constitution that says we have to hold primary elections for parties on the government dime. It is even more questionable using tax money to hold primaries when the electorate is ignored anyways. We should defund the primaries, if political parties want to select their candidates then they don't need or deserve tax money to do it.
The Washington Post - GOP preparing for contested convention. This is in essence the way the Republican elites plan on stealing the election from Trump even if he wins more votes than any other candidate in their party.
Washington Free Beacon - The Party Divides - Column: A Trump nomination would be the end of the GOP as we know it. Come on, you love reading the hysteria and insanity from these links. WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE PRIMARY YET! Why so much fear and hysteria so early on? Why are Republican insiders so afraid that Trump could win anything, he has never run for office before and has never had one person vote for him for anything. You know what scares them. It is that they will not be able to convince Republicans to not vote for him. A little story. When I was an undergraduate my degree was meant to be in Political Science (yes, I also qualified for degrees in Psychology and Sociology but they were not declared majors, just a hobby). In order to get my degree I had to take math classes. I decided to take classes in statistics. I ended up taking advanced statistics and more. I liked the teacher and found the work interesting. I actually learned to use a mainframe computer because of my statistics classes. My Professor worked for a major city and was in charge of their surveys. He actually offered me a job doing statistics for the City, I went to Law School instead; but, it was quite a compliment and he was a great guy. Wow, I need a moment.
You know, the Pimpernel has done a lot of dumb things in his life and I just recognized another one. I went to college so I could work in government and TURNED DOWN a job to work in government right out of college while I was still in college. Ahhhhhh. You know why I turned it down? I wanted to go to Law School, this is stupid because I never wanted to practice law and only wanted it to help me in government.
Anyways, I understood how statistics worked and how to do real surveys, most surveys you read about are garbage and don't actually qualify as valid. There are actually rules for taking valid surveys and verifying their accuracy. It is only because the media is more interested in shaping your opinion than accepting it that they don't use valid surveys. I don't want to get into the finer points of statistics so let me move on. The reality is that every candidate and every party has a statistician constantly doing surveys for them and they never release their own survey information. Why would anyone pay for a survey to show they were not going to win and had no support and then present it to the public? All the parties and candidates also hold focus groups. A focus group is where you take a selection of people with a particular interest and question them on why they have that interest. Through surveys and focus groups the Republican party and the other candidates believe his supporters are going to stick with him and vote for him. The Republican party has given up on the idea that they can prevent Trump from being supported by the republican voters.
Now lets play a game. Lets say that Trump wins the Republican party nomination and becomes President. How does a Republican congressman vote against his policies and get re-elected? How does a Republican congress vote against everything a Republican President proposes? LOL. A Trump win would force the Republicans to work with Democrats or support everything he wants to do. . LMAO.
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
The Continuing Failure of the Establishment to Get Rid of Trump.
The hysteria in the news about Donald Trump continues to amuse beyond anything I have seen in my lifetime. Anyone who has read my blog for any amount of time should know that I am a liberal and not a conservative supporter. There are a lot of pundits writing about why they believe people support Trump and none of them seem to get it. Now the media has gone as far as to compare Trump to Hitler, that is irrational hysteria and demonstrates their fear of Trump; but, more importantly their fear of American opinion.
The term that is frequently used to classify Trump is "populist"; but, what does the term mean. It means unrestrained by political party, it means representing the views of the public rather than shaping them. He is more an outgrowth of the Occupy Wall Street movement and the Tea Party then he is a representative of any political party or corporate interest and neither the media or the parties can accept that.
When the Occupy movement was going on a politician asked me what it meant and when would it end. After the Occupy movement was removed from public spaces across the nation I said it would only return in some new form. When the Tea Party was co-opted and destroyed, I said it would come back in a new form. Trump, and to a lesser extent Sanders, are the re-emergence of this frustration. The frustration with the fact that the opinions of most Americans are being ignored by business and politics.
Lets consider what Trump said when the Occupy Movement was going on.
Yahoo - Daily Ticker - Trump: Occupy Wall Street Indicates “There Is Something Wrong With This Country”. Here is a line from the article, "The movement, he believes, is a symptom of an unfair and unjust system that favors certain interests at the expense of ordinary Americans."
You may not understand why the media refuses to publicly recognize where his support is coming from; but, the reality is that through focus groups and interviews with Trump supporters, they do understand as the following article demonstrates.
Valuewalk - Donald Trump Channels Both Tea Party And Occupy Wall Street.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi
At first Trump was ignored as not a serious candidate, they he was ridiculed for everything including his hair, now for awhile they have been attacking him and it doesn't seem to be working either. Guess what comes next?
I have some Republican friends who support Trump and believe he might be assassinated to keep him from winning office. 68% of his supporters said they would vote for him even if he left the Republican party. The Republican party establishment itself has done everything they can think of to replace him as the front runner and nothing has worked. The options for getting rid of Trump are limited. If the Republican party removes him from the party, it will lose it's support and be incapable of getting a Republican elected. If the party fails to support him; but, he wins the primaries, he will run as a third party candidate and again the Republican party will be unable to elect the President. If it comes down to Trump versus Clinton people will join him from both parties because the hatred of Clinton is even worse.
Here is the real threat to the establishment and it is not Trump, it is why he has support. People are still angry that the country only seems to benefit others. People do not believe this country is fighting for it's own citizens. The elimination of the Tea Party and Occupy movements did not make the anger or distrust go away, it is merely expressing itself in a new way and will continue to until people believe the establishment has the best interest of Americans at heart in reality and not just more rhetoric.
As a side note, we have kept people out from other countries before. Asians were kept out during the 1800s, we all know about the Japanese being kept in internment camps during World War II and in the 1980s President Carter wouldn't allow Iranians in the country.
The Harvard Crimson - Carter Cuts Ties With Iran.
The term that is frequently used to classify Trump is "populist"; but, what does the term mean. It means unrestrained by political party, it means representing the views of the public rather than shaping them. He is more an outgrowth of the Occupy Wall Street movement and the Tea Party then he is a representative of any political party or corporate interest and neither the media or the parties can accept that.
When the Occupy movement was going on a politician asked me what it meant and when would it end. After the Occupy movement was removed from public spaces across the nation I said it would only return in some new form. When the Tea Party was co-opted and destroyed, I said it would come back in a new form. Trump, and to a lesser extent Sanders, are the re-emergence of this frustration. The frustration with the fact that the opinions of most Americans are being ignored by business and politics.
Lets consider what Trump said when the Occupy Movement was going on.
Yahoo - Daily Ticker - Trump: Occupy Wall Street Indicates “There Is Something Wrong With This Country”. Here is a line from the article, "The movement, he believes, is a symptom of an unfair and unjust system that favors certain interests at the expense of ordinary Americans."
You may not understand why the media refuses to publicly recognize where his support is coming from; but, the reality is that through focus groups and interviews with Trump supporters, they do understand as the following article demonstrates.
Valuewalk - Donald Trump Channels Both Tea Party And Occupy Wall Street.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi
At first Trump was ignored as not a serious candidate, they he was ridiculed for everything including his hair, now for awhile they have been attacking him and it doesn't seem to be working either. Guess what comes next?
I have some Republican friends who support Trump and believe he might be assassinated to keep him from winning office. 68% of his supporters said they would vote for him even if he left the Republican party. The Republican party establishment itself has done everything they can think of to replace him as the front runner and nothing has worked. The options for getting rid of Trump are limited. If the Republican party removes him from the party, it will lose it's support and be incapable of getting a Republican elected. If the party fails to support him; but, he wins the primaries, he will run as a third party candidate and again the Republican party will be unable to elect the President. If it comes down to Trump versus Clinton people will join him from both parties because the hatred of Clinton is even worse.
Here is the real threat to the establishment and it is not Trump, it is why he has support. People are still angry that the country only seems to benefit others. People do not believe this country is fighting for it's own citizens. The elimination of the Tea Party and Occupy movements did not make the anger or distrust go away, it is merely expressing itself in a new way and will continue to until people believe the establishment has the best interest of Americans at heart in reality and not just more rhetoric.
As a side note, we have kept people out from other countries before. Asians were kept out during the 1800s, we all know about the Japanese being kept in internment camps during World War II and in the 1980s President Carter wouldn't allow Iranians in the country.
The Harvard Crimson - Carter Cuts Ties With Iran.
Life in the United States
New York Post - Bloody photo shows California shooter dead. I was watching television when the San Bernardino shootings happened. It was one of those things you knew would matter as it was happening. For the first few hours they had no idea what had happened, the first real hint was that someone had left the party angry. That was it. They then said a black truck may have been involved. They also said there may have been three gunman and that only one person got in the truck. Now, days later, we believe there were only two shooters and that both left in the truck. We don't know what the intent was yet, there is no proof and presumed facts change early in.
Cheat Sheet - 8 Things the Middle Class Can't Afford Anymore. The new reality says that the middle class cannot expect vacations, a new car, student loans to go to college, emergency savings, retirement savings, medical care, dental work, or to miss a paycheck. Read the article. In the United States middle class means no security no matter how hard you work.
Yahoo - The Fiscal Times - Is Trump Leading a Genuine Political Movement? The answer is yes and no. All of my conservative friends like Trump and for very specific reasons. None of them think he is their perfect representative, they are just happy that he is sincere in representing their views. That is what scares the establishment the most, not Trump; but, the fact that conservatives are mad at the party and their destruction of the Tea Party.
Can Atheists Be Married?
Can anyone be married if they don't believe in the Judeo Christian God? If God said that Solomon had hundreds of wives, can we marry more than one person? If Jesus said that a woman he met had multiple husbands, what is marriage? Do people who don't believe the bible have the right to marry? Jesus said they did have the ability to marry when he said the woman with many husbands had many husbands. So if Jesus didn't require his approval for people to marry. what is marriage and can people of the same sex marry?
Marriage is a commitment of people to one another. God believes in free will and allows people to make commitments. He also advises against swearing by anything that you will keep your commitments. If you should not swear to God about anything then why should you swear to God about your marriage? Your commitments are not God's commitments, they are yours and he doesn't want you to swear to him that you will keep it, he just wants you to keep your word for you.
Marriage is a commitment of people to one another. God believes in free will and allows people to make commitments. He also advises against swearing by anything that you will keep your commitments. If you should not swear to God about anything then why should you swear to God about your marriage? Your commitments are not God's commitments, they are yours and he doesn't want you to swear to him that you will keep it, he just wants you to keep your word for you.
Monday, December 7, 2015
Trump, Muslims and the San Bernardino Shootings
Huffington Post - Donald Trump Calls For 'Complete Shutdown' Of Muslims Entering U.S.
Donald Trump came out and said that until we can figure out what is going on with Muslim Jihadists we should temporarily not let any Muslims into this country. I will start by saying that I don't agree with that; but, that is not what I am going to talk about. The responses from the other Republican candidates and how the media is framing it is what I find interesting.
Lets start with this simple fact. All the Republican candidates have been saying for weeks that we should not allow any Syrian refugees in because some of them might be terrorists. All of them have said that Trump is out of line because he has basically said the exact same thing they have said. Rand Paul even introduced legislation in congress a year ago to prevent people from 30 Muslim countries from coming to the United States and Cruz supported it. As for Carson, he has said that he would never want a Muslim to be President and is for strictly monitoring all visitors to the United States. Most importantly, not one of them has said that they wouldn't prohibit Muslims from coming here. What a bunch of hypocrites. Now I have read many outraged pundits saying how Trump is crazy by saying this; but, the truth is that most Republicans probably agree with him. The other Republican candidates have made an insincere complaint and this will probably get Trump more support not less. This could really pay off for Trump at the next debate, all he has to do is ask which of the candidates is for allowing Muslims from Arabia into the United States. They would be between a rock and a hard place as they have all said they don't want Syrian refugees here because some of them might be terrorists. Will they take that back? I think not.
Now, I want to talk in more general terms about Muslims and terrorism. For background I am Irish and my family has always been Irish Catholic. I am not a Catholic. When I was younger and an agnostic I was sympathetic to the Irish Republican Army (IRA). For a little background, my great-grandfather was in the original IRA before Ireland was freed from English control. In Northern Ireland the Catholics are still treated as second class citizens. While I am now a pacifist, I still want to see Ireland as a single country again with the Irish in charge of their own lands. The war in Ireland has never been about religion, it has always been about political control over Ireland. Now the war with terrorists is not about religion either. It is about political power and who will control Arabia. If they all converted to Hindu, they would still be terrorists. In fact, they are not killing people in Israel because they are Jewish, they are attacking them because they want the land back under Arab control. MOST WARS are about power and money. World War II was not about religion it was about control. Hitler did hate Jews, kill them and use them as an excuse; but, he also hated Russians and Slavs and killed even more of them. Most Muslims are peaceful and law abiding. Most Muslims are just like you and me, they just want to have a decent life with their family and friends. One should also remember that their are more Asian Muslims than Arab Muslims and we don't seem to be afraid of them. Maybe they aren't mad at us because, now this is just a thought, we are not bombing their homes.
In regards to the shootings in San Bernardino, I am extremely disappointed in the media. I have read that it is now confirmed that the female had pledged her allegiance to ISIS. That has not been proven, anonymous sources are not confirmation and no proof has been released to the public. It has also been stated that the killers had a "large stash of weapons and ammunition". That is also nonsense, especially coming from Fox news. The killers had two guns and two assault rifles all bought legally and a few thousand rounds of ammo. If you believe that is a large cache, two people each owning a gun and a rifle then you have no idea of how many people in this country have even more weapons and ammo. There are gun dealers with over a half million rounds of ammo in the United States, look up FPS Russia on YouTube and look at the sort of weapons he has access to. By the way, he is not really Russian.
The shooters in San Bernardino were definitely Muslim with one shooter being of Arab decent and the other of Pakistani decent (Pakistan is in Asia, not Arabia and it used to be part of India). They were not sophisticated with weapons. The bombs they mailed failed to detonate because they were not made properly. It may turn out that these two radical Muslims on a Jihad; but, we don't know that yet and I myself am not convinced. The whole point of a terrorist act is to let people know what you are fighting for or against. These shooters did not say anything.
Donald Trump came out and said that until we can figure out what is going on with Muslim Jihadists we should temporarily not let any Muslims into this country. I will start by saying that I don't agree with that; but, that is not what I am going to talk about. The responses from the other Republican candidates and how the media is framing it is what I find interesting.
Lets start with this simple fact. All the Republican candidates have been saying for weeks that we should not allow any Syrian refugees in because some of them might be terrorists. All of them have said that Trump is out of line because he has basically said the exact same thing they have said. Rand Paul even introduced legislation in congress a year ago to prevent people from 30 Muslim countries from coming to the United States and Cruz supported it. As for Carson, he has said that he would never want a Muslim to be President and is for strictly monitoring all visitors to the United States. Most importantly, not one of them has said that they wouldn't prohibit Muslims from coming here. What a bunch of hypocrites. Now I have read many outraged pundits saying how Trump is crazy by saying this; but, the truth is that most Republicans probably agree with him. The other Republican candidates have made an insincere complaint and this will probably get Trump more support not less. This could really pay off for Trump at the next debate, all he has to do is ask which of the candidates is for allowing Muslims from Arabia into the United States. They would be between a rock and a hard place as they have all said they don't want Syrian refugees here because some of them might be terrorists. Will they take that back? I think not.
Now, I want to talk in more general terms about Muslims and terrorism. For background I am Irish and my family has always been Irish Catholic. I am not a Catholic. When I was younger and an agnostic I was sympathetic to the Irish Republican Army (IRA). For a little background, my great-grandfather was in the original IRA before Ireland was freed from English control. In Northern Ireland the Catholics are still treated as second class citizens. While I am now a pacifist, I still want to see Ireland as a single country again with the Irish in charge of their own lands. The war in Ireland has never been about religion, it has always been about political control over Ireland. Now the war with terrorists is not about religion either. It is about political power and who will control Arabia. If they all converted to Hindu, they would still be terrorists. In fact, they are not killing people in Israel because they are Jewish, they are attacking them because they want the land back under Arab control. MOST WARS are about power and money. World War II was not about religion it was about control. Hitler did hate Jews, kill them and use them as an excuse; but, he also hated Russians and Slavs and killed even more of them. Most Muslims are peaceful and law abiding. Most Muslims are just like you and me, they just want to have a decent life with their family and friends. One should also remember that their are more Asian Muslims than Arab Muslims and we don't seem to be afraid of them. Maybe they aren't mad at us because, now this is just a thought, we are not bombing their homes.
In regards to the shootings in San Bernardino, I am extremely disappointed in the media. I have read that it is now confirmed that the female had pledged her allegiance to ISIS. That has not been proven, anonymous sources are not confirmation and no proof has been released to the public. It has also been stated that the killers had a "large stash of weapons and ammunition". That is also nonsense, especially coming from Fox news. The killers had two guns and two assault rifles all bought legally and a few thousand rounds of ammo. If you believe that is a large cache, two people each owning a gun and a rifle then you have no idea of how many people in this country have even more weapons and ammo. There are gun dealers with over a half million rounds of ammo in the United States, look up FPS Russia on YouTube and look at the sort of weapons he has access to. By the way, he is not really Russian.
The shooters in San Bernardino were definitely Muslim with one shooter being of Arab decent and the other of Pakistani decent (Pakistan is in Asia, not Arabia and it used to be part of India). They were not sophisticated with weapons. The bombs they mailed failed to detonate because they were not made properly. It may turn out that these two radical Muslims on a Jihad; but, we don't know that yet and I myself am not convinced. The whole point of a terrorist act is to let people know what you are fighting for or against. These shooters did not say anything.
Saturday, December 5, 2015
What is popular on YouTube
Here are some videos that you might find interesting. Personally I know that I am not aware of much pop culture anymore. I don't watch much television and I don't even know who most of the people I see on magazines are anymore. I hope these links amuse and help my readers to know what is popular in society today.
YouTube - Meat Feast Challenge at Foxton's Bar w/ Black Pudding, Haggis, & MORE!!
YouTube - ELDERS REACT TO JERSEY SHORE.
YouTube - Vegan Food Taste Test.
YouTube - Top 10 Controversial YouTube Channels - TopX.
YouTube - Top 10 Daredevil YouTube Channels - TopX Ep. 6.
YouTube - Top 10 YouTube Cover Artists - TopX Ep.7.
YouTube - Top 10 YouTube Entertainment and Alternative News Channels - TopX Ep.10.
YouTube - Top 10 Most Popular YouTube Channels of 2014 - TopX Ep.22.
YouTube - AA-12 Fully Automatic Shotgun!!!
YouTube - Meat Feast Challenge at Foxton's Bar w/ Black Pudding, Haggis, & MORE!!
YouTube - ELDERS REACT TO JERSEY SHORE.
YouTube - Vegan Food Taste Test.
YouTube - Top 10 Controversial YouTube Channels - TopX.
YouTube - Top 10 Daredevil YouTube Channels - TopX Ep. 6.
YouTube - Top 10 YouTube Cover Artists - TopX Ep.7.
YouTube - Top 10 YouTube Entertainment and Alternative News Channels - TopX Ep.10.
YouTube - Top 10 Most Popular YouTube Channels of 2014 - TopX Ep.22.
YouTube - AA-12 Fully Automatic Shotgun!!!
Friday, December 4, 2015
Donald Trump and Additional Thoughts on San Bernardino Shootings
Fox - GOP memo suggests Trump reality check for establishment. The National Republican Senate Committee has written a memo outlining how Republicans running for office should emulate his look and feel; but, also chastise him for being anti-woman. I have a link to the actual memo below.
Fox - Panic city: The GOP's pipsqueak 'revolt' against Donald Trump. It is fairly clear that the Republican party establishment is more afraid of Trump winning than they are of a Democrat winning and that is sad. What they are really afraid of is politicians not following party dictates and policy.
Washington Post - Memo on Donald Trump from Ward Baker to NRSC senior staff. The memo is one of the most cynical things I have ever read and highlights the problem with party politics. Lets look at some quotes from it. "Trump says what's on his mind and that is a problem". "People talk about problems not issues". The memo says that candidates should use PR of regular people discussing their problems and how the politician fixed it; but, it hen says "Feature them in your issue phase while you assume the role of citizen-servant". In other words, act like you are actually out for them; but, remember it is just a role. Wow. "We may not like it, but Trump has connected with voters on issues like trade with China and America's broken borders". This should make it apparent to the most strident Republican party that the party does not have your concerns or issues at heart. The memo then says to talk about anything other than outsourcing jobs or trade and that politicians should instead focus on Chinese hackers and their industrial espionage. "Trump has been gaining Democrat adherents and he's solidifying GOP cohorts who feel they have been totally ignored by the Washington Ruling Elite".
UPDATE: I wrote this post a few days ago and today, 12/11/2015, I found someone else discussing it. The video is from YouTube by The Young Turks.
Basically the memo says that the party is experiencing a "populist wave" and to just adopt the illusion you are one of them and wait it out. Trump for his part didn't take much notice of the memo. He said that the memo was basically about people trying to emulate him and that they couldn't. He is right on both charges. He was not surprised because he already knew the politicians lied to their voters. Now you may like Trump or hate him and you may be a Democrat or a Republican; but, what you should really take from this memo is how insincere the parties are. The parties are not here to represent you, they represent the party big wigs who pay the parties bills and reward the politicians that vote for what they want. Now do you understand why companies that outsource American jobs still get tax breaks?
San Bernardino Shootings Update:
Well two days have passed and the FBI has been reviewing everything that led to the shootings. They have been questioning the people that knew them, reading their e-mails, checking out who they called and every aspect of their lives. Fox news insists that they were Muslim terrorists; but, that hasn't been proven and is probably not true. The thing about terrorism is that you have to let people know that what you did was politically motivated. They covered their heads with masks and did not say one thing while shooting people. My first thought was that this was workplace violence; but, neither terrorism nor workplace violence quite make sense and I will tell you why. Firstly, why did they stop shooting people and leave so quickly? They could have stayed longer and killed everyone in that room. Secondly, why did they return home and then leave again? Where were they heading? If it was just to kill more people they didn't have to leave where they were and if it was workplace violence then why did they have bombs and ammunition? They had made a perfect escape, why go back out? What if what they did was meant to be a distraction for the police? The man made a scene of leaving the party angry, what if that was meant to be his alibi down the road for something else. What if they had planned to rob a bank or store? I am not saying that is what happened or even that they are not terrorists, we just don't know yet. What I find interesting is people assuming that they were terrorists because they were Muslims. Guess what, there are Muslim criminals and bank robbers too.
By the way, I am confused by people saying that the couple involved was sophisticated or trained because they made pipe bombs. Kids were making pipe bombs in the 1970s, it is just not that difficult. It requires no training. You don't have to go to a terrorist website to learn how to do it. Now the fact that the killers had GoPro cameras is interesting if true. The question is what was on them. I would think that the cops would have immediately reviewed what was on the cameras, why have they not said what was on them? We don't know what their motivation was and that is strange. Both workplace murders and acts of terrorism usually include the people attempting to explain their actions. It also turns out that the two stopped going to church three weeks before. Also consider the fact that if the man was truly a devout Muslim why did he attend Christmas parties because this one was not his first. Consider the vehicle was a rental due to be returned Thursday and they wore masks and didn't talk. They were hoping to get off without being caught. By the way, one of the shooters friends was a Messianic Jew.
Here is a listing of the people killed.
Huffington Post - These Are The Victims Of The San Bernardino Shooting.
Fox - Panic city: The GOP's pipsqueak 'revolt' against Donald Trump. It is fairly clear that the Republican party establishment is more afraid of Trump winning than they are of a Democrat winning and that is sad. What they are really afraid of is politicians not following party dictates and policy.
Washington Post - Memo on Donald Trump from Ward Baker to NRSC senior staff. The memo is one of the most cynical things I have ever read and highlights the problem with party politics. Lets look at some quotes from it. "Trump says what's on his mind and that is a problem". "People talk about problems not issues". The memo says that candidates should use PR of regular people discussing their problems and how the politician fixed it; but, it hen says "Feature them in your issue phase while you assume the role of citizen-servant". In other words, act like you are actually out for them; but, remember it is just a role. Wow. "We may not like it, but Trump has connected with voters on issues like trade with China and America's broken borders". This should make it apparent to the most strident Republican party that the party does not have your concerns or issues at heart. The memo then says to talk about anything other than outsourcing jobs or trade and that politicians should instead focus on Chinese hackers and their industrial espionage. "Trump has been gaining Democrat adherents and he's solidifying GOP cohorts who feel they have been totally ignored by the Washington Ruling Elite".
UPDATE: I wrote this post a few days ago and today, 12/11/2015, I found someone else discussing it. The video is from YouTube by The Young Turks.
Basically the memo says that the party is experiencing a "populist wave" and to just adopt the illusion you are one of them and wait it out. Trump for his part didn't take much notice of the memo. He said that the memo was basically about people trying to emulate him and that they couldn't. He is right on both charges. He was not surprised because he already knew the politicians lied to their voters. Now you may like Trump or hate him and you may be a Democrat or a Republican; but, what you should really take from this memo is how insincere the parties are. The parties are not here to represent you, they represent the party big wigs who pay the parties bills and reward the politicians that vote for what they want. Now do you understand why companies that outsource American jobs still get tax breaks?
San Bernardino Shootings Update:
Well two days have passed and the FBI has been reviewing everything that led to the shootings. They have been questioning the people that knew them, reading their e-mails, checking out who they called and every aspect of their lives. Fox news insists that they were Muslim terrorists; but, that hasn't been proven and is probably not true. The thing about terrorism is that you have to let people know that what you did was politically motivated. They covered their heads with masks and did not say one thing while shooting people. My first thought was that this was workplace violence; but, neither terrorism nor workplace violence quite make sense and I will tell you why. Firstly, why did they stop shooting people and leave so quickly? They could have stayed longer and killed everyone in that room. Secondly, why did they return home and then leave again? Where were they heading? If it was just to kill more people they didn't have to leave where they were and if it was workplace violence then why did they have bombs and ammunition? They had made a perfect escape, why go back out? What if what they did was meant to be a distraction for the police? The man made a scene of leaving the party angry, what if that was meant to be his alibi down the road for something else. What if they had planned to rob a bank or store? I am not saying that is what happened or even that they are not terrorists, we just don't know yet. What I find interesting is people assuming that they were terrorists because they were Muslims. Guess what, there are Muslim criminals and bank robbers too.
By the way, I am confused by people saying that the couple involved was sophisticated or trained because they made pipe bombs. Kids were making pipe bombs in the 1970s, it is just not that difficult. It requires no training. You don't have to go to a terrorist website to learn how to do it. Now the fact that the killers had GoPro cameras is interesting if true. The question is what was on them. I would think that the cops would have immediately reviewed what was on the cameras, why have they not said what was on them? We don't know what their motivation was and that is strange. Both workplace murders and acts of terrorism usually include the people attempting to explain their actions. It also turns out that the two stopped going to church three weeks before. Also consider the fact that if the man was truly a devout Muslim why did he attend Christmas parties because this one was not his first. Consider the vehicle was a rental due to be returned Thursday and they wore masks and didn't talk. They were hoping to get off without being caught. By the way, one of the shooters friends was a Messianic Jew.
Here is a listing of the people killed.
Huffington Post - These Are The Victims Of The San Bernardino Shooting.
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Would You Allow Suspected Terrorists to Buy Guns?
There was a shooting today in San Bernardino. 14 people are reported dead and 17 reported injured. I was watching what was happening on Fox news. We don't know a lot about why or who just yet. While reporting on the event the Fox reporters continued saying that the perpetrators had "long guns". Later Bill O'Reilly said they used large caliber guns. Nobody uses these terms in the real world. The weapons are called assault rifles. Try going into a gun shop and asking for a long gun or a large caliber gun and the dealer will show you a 44 caliber pistol. It has been told to reporters at Fox that the police were looking for people with AK47s, those are assault rifles.
It turns out that at least one of the weapons was more like an AR15. It is an assault rifle. The term "long gun" turns out to have been in an answer that a police officer gave to a newspersons question. He told them that long guns were used. It was in response to a question if the perpetrators used guns.
UPDATE:
So I have continued watching the news reports during the day. That is what retired people do. It was interesting to watch Fox assume this is a terrorist attack and hearing their logic on why it must be. I doubt very much this was a terrorist attack. Hey, it may be; but, the facts do not indicate that at this time other than the fact that the killers were of Arabian decent. One of them was born here though. They were married and had a six month old child and the people they killed were co-workers of the husband who had even thrown a baby shower for him and his wife months earlier. Wait, he killed them at their annual Christmas party and had attended in prior years having worked for the County for five years. It has been reported from the beginning that he got in an argument at the party; but, Fox believes he only went to the party to scope out the victims. They say they cannot understand why the killer left the party and returned after preparing (changing clothes and getting weapons and his wife). I am shocked that they are not aware of such a thing as it has happened in many workplace violence situations.
I will tell you my "guess" right now and if Fox can guess then so can I. This was workplace violence. I have known two groups of people killed in separate acts of workplace violence. Both cases had racial aspects; but, neither was racial. They were both based on psychosis and persecution illusions. Both the perpetrators were lousy employees who were incapable of accepting responsibility for their work approach. I would like to know what the performance reviews were of the suspect in this case.
Here is my question for you. If it turns out that the killer was both a Muslim and was being disciplined at work for poor performance, which will you assume is true that he was a terrorist or a disgruntled employee? What if he killed them because he felt they were treating him poorly because he was an Arab or a Muslim? Look workplace violence is committed by Christians, Atheists, Hindus, Muslims and any other group you can think of.
COMMENT:
I will start by reiterating that I have been a preacher and am a pacifist. Okay, yeah, I have some biases on right and wrong. Now let me ask a question. I keep reading that guns don't kill, people do. Well, tell me guns did not kill these 14 people and wound another 14 (it is believed that 3 hurt themselves escaping)? For Ben Carson I will also ask a question, how do you get people to rush a gunman with a semi-automatic rifle within seconds of his entering a room? For the Republican candidates I ask how can you say, "We just have to accept this can happen?" Here is another question, why should it be easier to get a gun then vote? Now, the reason Fox wants to blame these killings on terrorists is clear; but, they bought the guns here and probably legally. If we are so worried about terrorists (foreign or domestic) then why let anyone buy a gun without checking their history out? Should it be legal for suspected terrorists to buy guns here?
Republicans are calling for investigating all Muslims extensively before letting them move here. Yet they are for no investigations into people wanting to buy guns or assault rifles or body armor. The guy that killed the people in San Bernardino was born here. Tell me how many foreigners have been responsible for mass shooting in the United States. Yeah. We do it to ourselves. Can we deal with that and think about that?
Here is the truth. San Bernardino is nothing, it is an uninhabited area of desert, not far away is Los Angeles, an area of millions. I remember after 9-11 driving back from the east coast to the west coast. I remember being in the Midwest towns and people being afraid that the next terrorist attack was going to be in their town, even if it only had a few thousand people. Muslim ground troops are not headed for Iowa or Ohio or any other meaningless place. Sorry if you are from the Midwest; but, if there are terrorists coming here, they are looking for New York, Los Angeles and Chicago. Do you really believe Jerktown, Missouri is at more risk that New York?
It turns out that at least one of the weapons was more like an AR15. It is an assault rifle. The term "long gun" turns out to have been in an answer that a police officer gave to a newspersons question. He told them that long guns were used. It was in response to a question if the perpetrators used guns.
UPDATE:
So I have continued watching the news reports during the day. That is what retired people do. It was interesting to watch Fox assume this is a terrorist attack and hearing their logic on why it must be. I doubt very much this was a terrorist attack. Hey, it may be; but, the facts do not indicate that at this time other than the fact that the killers were of Arabian decent. One of them was born here though. They were married and had a six month old child and the people they killed were co-workers of the husband who had even thrown a baby shower for him and his wife months earlier. Wait, he killed them at their annual Christmas party and had attended in prior years having worked for the County for five years. It has been reported from the beginning that he got in an argument at the party; but, Fox believes he only went to the party to scope out the victims. They say they cannot understand why the killer left the party and returned after preparing (changing clothes and getting weapons and his wife). I am shocked that they are not aware of such a thing as it has happened in many workplace violence situations.
I will tell you my "guess" right now and if Fox can guess then so can I. This was workplace violence. I have known two groups of people killed in separate acts of workplace violence. Both cases had racial aspects; but, neither was racial. They were both based on psychosis and persecution illusions. Both the perpetrators were lousy employees who were incapable of accepting responsibility for their work approach. I would like to know what the performance reviews were of the suspect in this case.
Here is my question for you. If it turns out that the killer was both a Muslim and was being disciplined at work for poor performance, which will you assume is true that he was a terrorist or a disgruntled employee? What if he killed them because he felt they were treating him poorly because he was an Arab or a Muslim? Look workplace violence is committed by Christians, Atheists, Hindus, Muslims and any other group you can think of.
COMMENT:
I will start by reiterating that I have been a preacher and am a pacifist. Okay, yeah, I have some biases on right and wrong. Now let me ask a question. I keep reading that guns don't kill, people do. Well, tell me guns did not kill these 14 people and wound another 14 (it is believed that 3 hurt themselves escaping)? For Ben Carson I will also ask a question, how do you get people to rush a gunman with a semi-automatic rifle within seconds of his entering a room? For the Republican candidates I ask how can you say, "We just have to accept this can happen?" Here is another question, why should it be easier to get a gun then vote? Now, the reason Fox wants to blame these killings on terrorists is clear; but, they bought the guns here and probably legally. If we are so worried about terrorists (foreign or domestic) then why let anyone buy a gun without checking their history out? Should it be legal for suspected terrorists to buy guns here?
Republicans are calling for investigating all Muslims extensively before letting them move here. Yet they are for no investigations into people wanting to buy guns or assault rifles or body armor. The guy that killed the people in San Bernardino was born here. Tell me how many foreigners have been responsible for mass shooting in the United States. Yeah. We do it to ourselves. Can we deal with that and think about that?
Here is the truth. San Bernardino is nothing, it is an uninhabited area of desert, not far away is Los Angeles, an area of millions. I remember after 9-11 driving back from the east coast to the west coast. I remember being in the Midwest towns and people being afraid that the next terrorist attack was going to be in their town, even if it only had a few thousand people. Muslim ground troops are not headed for Iowa or Ohio or any other meaningless place. Sorry if you are from the Midwest; but, if there are terrorists coming here, they are looking for New York, Los Angeles and Chicago. Do you really believe Jerktown, Missouri is at more risk that New York?
Monday, November 30, 2015
Different News Articles and Some Thoughts
Fox - Washington Free Beacon - Labor costs to skyrocket for American cars. Since 2008 most auto jobs in the United States saw no cost of living raise. Now, 7 years later they are getting raises of 5 to 9%. This seems to horrify certain conservatives. There are two things I wish to point out. Firstly, American car manufacturers have most of their parts made oversees, not in America. As previously reported, the cars with the highest percentage of American parts are Japanese auto manufacturers. Second, the executives at the companies that took bailouts and were responsible for the economic crash continued getting bonuses since 2008.
Las Vegas Review Journal - Nevada pursues Route 160 widening project. Now, you have probably never heard of this highway as it goes from Las Vegas to Pahrump, Nevada. It is two lanes in both directions and is practically empty most of the time. I have driven it many times and know it well. In fact, I was once snowed in on it's highest point. There is no need to widen it as it is lightly travelled now. Nevada is saying that they are going to widen it for safety and increased traffic. Huh? What increased traffic? What is going to be built north of Las Vegas near Nellis Air Force Base?
Business Insider - Switzerland is about to launch a huge experiment in 'the war on cash'. This is a very interesting article about how the central banks in Switzerland and Sweden are charging negative interest rates on money issued to other banks. Basically, this is charging people a fee for holding their money rather than paying interest. Well, in the countries mentioned about few use actual cash and most transactions are electronic so the people don't notice their money being taken away as much.
Fox - 'Needless experiment': Cities weigh gov't-backed broadband, critics see tax $$ at risk. Basically, some cities and states want to provide their residents with universal Wi-Fi. This is not surprising as it is municipal right of ways that allow the towers to be put up. Certain companies see an opportunity to make lots of money and therefore want to prohibit cities from building wi-fi for their residents. This is amusing as the internet was created by the government and not private industry.
Yahoo - AFP - IMF poised to put Chinese yuan in elite currency basket. I have been saying this was coming for a few years now. While most people will not understand what it means to be a reserve currency or a "hard" currency, it basically means that your currency is accepted in other countries. The dollar has been the world currency for decades; but, that could very well end and that will make it harder for us to pay our debts.
Las Vegas Review Journal - Nevada pursues Route 160 widening project. Now, you have probably never heard of this highway as it goes from Las Vegas to Pahrump, Nevada. It is two lanes in both directions and is practically empty most of the time. I have driven it many times and know it well. In fact, I was once snowed in on it's highest point. There is no need to widen it as it is lightly travelled now. Nevada is saying that they are going to widen it for safety and increased traffic. Huh? What increased traffic? What is going to be built north of Las Vegas near Nellis Air Force Base?
Business Insider - Switzerland is about to launch a huge experiment in 'the war on cash'. This is a very interesting article about how the central banks in Switzerland and Sweden are charging negative interest rates on money issued to other banks. Basically, this is charging people a fee for holding their money rather than paying interest. Well, in the countries mentioned about few use actual cash and most transactions are electronic so the people don't notice their money being taken away as much.
Fox - 'Needless experiment': Cities weigh gov't-backed broadband, critics see tax $$ at risk. Basically, some cities and states want to provide their residents with universal Wi-Fi. This is not surprising as it is municipal right of ways that allow the towers to be put up. Certain companies see an opportunity to make lots of money and therefore want to prohibit cities from building wi-fi for their residents. This is amusing as the internet was created by the government and not private industry.
Yahoo - AFP - IMF poised to put Chinese yuan in elite currency basket. I have been saying this was coming for a few years now. While most people will not understand what it means to be a reserve currency or a "hard" currency, it basically means that your currency is accepted in other countries. The dollar has been the world currency for decades; but, that could very well end and that will make it harder for us to pay our debts.
Sunday, November 29, 2015
Schools and Opportunities
In the United States everyone under 18 is required to go to school. That is pretty common in most of the civilized world; but, it was not always so. Up until the 1900s kids either worked on the farm or in factories and coal mines by the time they were about 12. Back in the middle ages and prior almost nobody knew how to read and write. In the 1800s it was even illegal to teach slaves how to read in much of the United States. As industry grew in the 1900s, the country needed more educated people. Prior to that the only poor and middle class people that learned to read were either in the church or the military.
It has been said that "knowledge is power" and restricting people from having access to the history of the world and an understanding of how we got where we are was restricted to the "elite", to "those in power and their children", the rest of us did not have a need to know in the eyes of the rulers of this world. Collectivism, working together, is the idea that we all deserve a chance to prove our value, a chance to prove that we can do at least as or more than others who have an advantage in the game already because of wealth, collectivism means a belief in merit over birth and connections.
I shall simplify. What method should be used to determine who succeeds? Should you succeed because your family can pay for you to succeed, because you are the most suitable and best to succeed or because of a lottery drawing? Those are all things we can build the rules around that determine who succeeds. Which do you choose? If you choose merit then you need to create a system that allows people to compete based on merit and merit alone. By destroying the public school system, do you really believe that people who cannot afford a decent school have the same chance as do those who can afford better teachers?
It has been said that "knowledge is power" and restricting people from having access to the history of the world and an understanding of how we got where we are was restricted to the "elite", to "those in power and their children", the rest of us did not have a need to know in the eyes of the rulers of this world. Collectivism, working together, is the idea that we all deserve a chance to prove our value, a chance to prove that we can do at least as or more than others who have an advantage in the game already because of wealth, collectivism means a belief in merit over birth and connections.
I shall simplify. What method should be used to determine who succeeds? Should you succeed because your family can pay for you to succeed, because you are the most suitable and best to succeed or because of a lottery drawing? Those are all things we can build the rules around that determine who succeeds. Which do you choose? If you choose merit then you need to create a system that allows people to compete based on merit and merit alone. By destroying the public school system, do you really believe that people who cannot afford a decent school have the same chance as do those who can afford better teachers?
Saturday, November 28, 2015
Cocaine Mummies and Polynesia
So here is a fun one for you. This museum was testing some Egyptian mummies and discovered that they had traces of tobacco and cocaine. The problem is that the Egyptians are not known to have gone to South America and even if they had, they then would have had to pass through the cape of South America and travelled up the western coast of South America to Peru. Still, that is one of the more popular theories. It is also not possible for the Peruvians to have travelled to Egypt and not have any reports of it. Neither the Egyptians nor the Peruvians were known as great seafarers. Both had boats but they were basically small fishing boats. This has left the "scientists" confused.
YouTube - Cocaine Mummies of Ancient Egypt
I find the idea that the shipping had to be done by the Egyptians hilarious. Back 3,000 years ago there was only one culture that we know was travelling sufficiently far and across the ocean and that is the Polynesians. Not only that; but, we know that they had been in South America as in the last couple of years DNA proved it. There is an old tribe in South America that was found to have Polynesian DNA and it also appears that they did not intermarry with the Indians much.
Now lets talk about the South Pacific. To start with, it is big, it is one-third of the earth. It is much, much bigger than the Atlantic Ocean and had been travelled much larger distances than the Atlantic was ever travelled until the 1500s when Europeans finally travelled both the Atlantic and the Pacific. The purpose of all long boat trips back then was necessity. Ask yourself, for a moment, why were the Polynesians the only people to bother to keep searching the ocean for other lands? Next question, why didn't the Polynesians take over New Zealand or Australia? Australia is much closer to where Polynesia begins than is Hawaii and a heck of a lot easier to get to with many more resources and miles of beach.
I will post a link to a map; but, the South Pacific was inhabited by a small number of groups. The three biggest groups are the Polynesians, Melanesians and Micronesians. We know these groups were all seafaring and had regular interaction. The Polynesians were the greatest sailors of the three. All three of these groups could reach the Philippines and New Guinea which is part of Melanesia. The Polynesians are thought to be descendants of the Austronesians who stretched from Taiwan to Madagascar about 3,000 BC. Let me simplify all of this, we know the Polynesians had travelled to both South America and Asia. This is accepted and also that it happened thousands of years ago.
When I was at University some of my Professors thought I should become one too and one of them suggested that I become an expert in Polynesian government. He thought it would be a good niche and guarantee me a spot as a Professor as there weren't any others specializing in it. Truth is, the governing of Polynesia was never something that interested me, I was more interested in their history as a whole. I was actually fascinated with Polynesia from a Sociological standpoint and the effect World War II had on destroying their way of life.
One of the most fascinating questions is why did the Polynesians bother travelling the Pacific in the first place. Hawaii is thousands of miles away from other islands and sits pretty much alone; but, for some reason the Polynesians travelled there and peopled it. Why? Australia was closer as was South America and Africa. Why travel so far on the chance that you might find another island? Why don't we see much DNA swapping between Africa and the Polynesians and a lot between the Polynesians and the Asians?
Now, we have found Chinese silk in clothes worn by Egyptians. That proves that Egypt and China had trade. If not directly, then by intermediaries. Anything that could go to China could therefore end up in Egypt. The Polynesians were shown to be partly from Taiwan. All of what I have discussed is established, I have given you the link. Read up anywhere about Polynesia, check the time frames. So what makes it so hard for the established historians to understand that the Polynesians were the most likely candidate for having transported the cocaine, tobacco to Asia and then travel from Asia to Egypt. Why do they want to believe that the Egyptians were the ones that had to travel to Peru and apparently do so on a semi-regular basis and not have developed ships more suited to the travel?
Both Darwinians and Anthropologists have the same bias. It is a social big bang theory, the idea that an event in one place fanned out and created the rest. Since the creation of patents we now know that multiple people can create the same thing at the same time or the same things at different times without knowing of the others invention, like the typewriter. South America and Egypt had pyramids, as did many other countries, without knowing about the others. No idea is unique and if it works, it will be found. The bigger question is how things travel.
I want to talk about trade secrets. For over a thousand years, the creation of silk was a trade secret held by China. The silkworms only lived there and were not allowed to be moved under penalty of death, yet, silk and Indian spices travelled the old world. If you wanted to trade back in the day, you had to have a good transportation system OR series of transportation systems. If the Polynesians were travelling from Asia to South America, as is now proven, then what would you expect them to transport to use as trade? Polynesia's number one commodity is Coconut meat. That would be hard to transport over long distances and still have value. Cocaine works pretty well and has immediately obvious effects proving it's value, same for tobacco.
For those of you who like a alien explanation for why the Egyptians and South American's made pyramids, consider the fact that the Polynesians were also masters of moving megaliths and shaping them as they did on Easter Island. Take all of this in and ask yourself why science has denied that the Polynesians traveled to Asia and South America for so long and it is only in the last 15 years that we know they were all wrong. What is so horrible about believing that the Polynesians had an effect on trade between the old world and the new world. It is much easier to get from Easter Island to South America then it is to get there from the old world and the Polynesians have already demonstrated that they did it.
You know what the Arabian nomads and the Polynesians had in common? They both traded in the most expensive things that didn't quickly spoil. Opium comes mainly from Afghanistan; but, was used in Egypt by the priests alone and in China. Egypt does not produce opium and never has as far as we can tell. They had to trade for it and limited it's use to their priests. What do you think they would have thought of cocaine? The mummies found to have cocaine in them were royalty. Is it that hard to believe that cocaine would have been limited to the use of royalty when it was so valued and hard to obtain?
Wikipedia - Polynesia
YouTube - Cocaine Mummies of Ancient Egypt
I find the idea that the shipping had to be done by the Egyptians hilarious. Back 3,000 years ago there was only one culture that we know was travelling sufficiently far and across the ocean and that is the Polynesians. Not only that; but, we know that they had been in South America as in the last couple of years DNA proved it. There is an old tribe in South America that was found to have Polynesian DNA and it also appears that they did not intermarry with the Indians much.
Now lets talk about the South Pacific. To start with, it is big, it is one-third of the earth. It is much, much bigger than the Atlantic Ocean and had been travelled much larger distances than the Atlantic was ever travelled until the 1500s when Europeans finally travelled both the Atlantic and the Pacific. The purpose of all long boat trips back then was necessity. Ask yourself, for a moment, why were the Polynesians the only people to bother to keep searching the ocean for other lands? Next question, why didn't the Polynesians take over New Zealand or Australia? Australia is much closer to where Polynesia begins than is Hawaii and a heck of a lot easier to get to with many more resources and miles of beach.
I will post a link to a map; but, the South Pacific was inhabited by a small number of groups. The three biggest groups are the Polynesians, Melanesians and Micronesians. We know these groups were all seafaring and had regular interaction. The Polynesians were the greatest sailors of the three. All three of these groups could reach the Philippines and New Guinea which is part of Melanesia. The Polynesians are thought to be descendants of the Austronesians who stretched from Taiwan to Madagascar about 3,000 BC. Let me simplify all of this, we know the Polynesians had travelled to both South America and Asia. This is accepted and also that it happened thousands of years ago.
When I was at University some of my Professors thought I should become one too and one of them suggested that I become an expert in Polynesian government. He thought it would be a good niche and guarantee me a spot as a Professor as there weren't any others specializing in it. Truth is, the governing of Polynesia was never something that interested me, I was more interested in their history as a whole. I was actually fascinated with Polynesia from a Sociological standpoint and the effect World War II had on destroying their way of life.
One of the most fascinating questions is why did the Polynesians bother travelling the Pacific in the first place. Hawaii is thousands of miles away from other islands and sits pretty much alone; but, for some reason the Polynesians travelled there and peopled it. Why? Australia was closer as was South America and Africa. Why travel so far on the chance that you might find another island? Why don't we see much DNA swapping between Africa and the Polynesians and a lot between the Polynesians and the Asians?
Now, we have found Chinese silk in clothes worn by Egyptians. That proves that Egypt and China had trade. If not directly, then by intermediaries. Anything that could go to China could therefore end up in Egypt. The Polynesians were shown to be partly from Taiwan. All of what I have discussed is established, I have given you the link. Read up anywhere about Polynesia, check the time frames. So what makes it so hard for the established historians to understand that the Polynesians were the most likely candidate for having transported the cocaine, tobacco to Asia and then travel from Asia to Egypt. Why do they want to believe that the Egyptians were the ones that had to travel to Peru and apparently do so on a semi-regular basis and not have developed ships more suited to the travel?
Both Darwinians and Anthropologists have the same bias. It is a social big bang theory, the idea that an event in one place fanned out and created the rest. Since the creation of patents we now know that multiple people can create the same thing at the same time or the same things at different times without knowing of the others invention, like the typewriter. South America and Egypt had pyramids, as did many other countries, without knowing about the others. No idea is unique and if it works, it will be found. The bigger question is how things travel.
I want to talk about trade secrets. For over a thousand years, the creation of silk was a trade secret held by China. The silkworms only lived there and were not allowed to be moved under penalty of death, yet, silk and Indian spices travelled the old world. If you wanted to trade back in the day, you had to have a good transportation system OR series of transportation systems. If the Polynesians were travelling from Asia to South America, as is now proven, then what would you expect them to transport to use as trade? Polynesia's number one commodity is Coconut meat. That would be hard to transport over long distances and still have value. Cocaine works pretty well and has immediately obvious effects proving it's value, same for tobacco.
For those of you who like a alien explanation for why the Egyptians and South American's made pyramids, consider the fact that the Polynesians were also masters of moving megaliths and shaping them as they did on Easter Island. Take all of this in and ask yourself why science has denied that the Polynesians traveled to Asia and South America for so long and it is only in the last 15 years that we know they were all wrong. What is so horrible about believing that the Polynesians had an effect on trade between the old world and the new world. It is much easier to get from Easter Island to South America then it is to get there from the old world and the Polynesians have already demonstrated that they did it.
You know what the Arabian nomads and the Polynesians had in common? They both traded in the most expensive things that didn't quickly spoil. Opium comes mainly from Afghanistan; but, was used in Egypt by the priests alone and in China. Egypt does not produce opium and never has as far as we can tell. They had to trade for it and limited it's use to their priests. What do you think they would have thought of cocaine? The mummies found to have cocaine in them were royalty. Is it that hard to believe that cocaine would have been limited to the use of royalty when it was so valued and hard to obtain?
Wikipedia - Polynesia
Friday, November 27, 2015
Wednesday, November 25, 2015
Those Who Rule and What They Hate
The easiest way to control people and have them build their own cages is by convincing them that it is in their own best interest and having them choose the answer or solution themselves. The people who manage the world are those who have studied control. Political Science is the study or controlling societies. With the advent of democratic voting it became the study of influencing public opinion and policy. While many have heard of Machiavelli's "The Prince", it was not the first such proof of this school of learning, it was just the first time the public became aware of it. Prior to that, people didn't even consider the fact that a methodical approach was used to control society.
If we accept the fact that people study controlling others than we must ask what things would they find the most of a hindrance. Democracy is one thing that would get in the way of control. This is also the reason that many have always tried to limit voting to specific groups. In the United States both women and blacks were not allowed to vote for decades and decades. Many who voted on the constitution wanted to limit voting to male land owners. Why don't we let felons vote? I mean just because someone is a felon doesn't mean they are not effected by the laws that they must live under and remember, they already were released to society. Political parties are nothing more than a few picking their parties nominees. The reason nobody likes our choices for office is because they are chosen by a few within the party and the party is meant to tell you who to vote for. Party conventions are not really to choose the candidate, they are there to excite the members who only think their opinions matter.
The Church gets in the way of those who wish to rule the world or a nation. The church says there are rules that you must live by. It does not matter which religion you pick, they are all hated because they all tell people what they cannot do. Cannot means to refuse the government. Mohammed Ali refused to go to Vietnam based on religious conviction and he was found guilty of a crime for it. Many went to jail when they refused to kill during the Vietnam war.
True socialism, that is people working together for the common good, is detested by those who wish to control. You cannot control the majority of people if there is no carrot or stick. Even worse is the idea of the great unwashed masses looking out for their best interests by working together, they have to be reliant on getting rewarded only when they benefit their leaders. While independence is seen as annoying, interdependence is seen as revolt.
The thing that pisses off those who control us the most is when we don't follow, when we choose for ourselves and are in agreement and don't give them the answer they want. For the first time in a long time we have two candidates who are not controlled by the controllers of this world, Trump and Sanders, and you know what they will not be allowed to win. I would bet money in Vegas on that right this second. Neither will be President. The winner is probably going to be Clinton. If the Republican party sabotages Trump, I guarantee that a lot of Republicans will leave the party. Parties have died before, you don't see too many Tory's anymore. If Trump gets the nomination and loses to Clinton the Republican's will blame it on their members who voted for Trump in the primaries.
Now here is where life could get really interesting. What if Trump won the Republican nomination for President, accepted it and then ran as an Independent. If he did that, he would beat Clinton because Democrats would feel better about voting for an Independent than a Republican. Now that would be truly interesting. I do not expect Trump to run as a third party; but, if he won the parties nomination and then ran as an independent anyways, he would win. Heck, if he actually did it the way I have outlined, congress; both Democrats and Republicans, would have to vote for his policies out of fear of losing their seats in the next election.
If we accept the fact that people study controlling others than we must ask what things would they find the most of a hindrance. Democracy is one thing that would get in the way of control. This is also the reason that many have always tried to limit voting to specific groups. In the United States both women and blacks were not allowed to vote for decades and decades. Many who voted on the constitution wanted to limit voting to male land owners. Why don't we let felons vote? I mean just because someone is a felon doesn't mean they are not effected by the laws that they must live under and remember, they already were released to society. Political parties are nothing more than a few picking their parties nominees. The reason nobody likes our choices for office is because they are chosen by a few within the party and the party is meant to tell you who to vote for. Party conventions are not really to choose the candidate, they are there to excite the members who only think their opinions matter.
The Church gets in the way of those who wish to rule the world or a nation. The church says there are rules that you must live by. It does not matter which religion you pick, they are all hated because they all tell people what they cannot do. Cannot means to refuse the government. Mohammed Ali refused to go to Vietnam based on religious conviction and he was found guilty of a crime for it. Many went to jail when they refused to kill during the Vietnam war.
True socialism, that is people working together for the common good, is detested by those who wish to control. You cannot control the majority of people if there is no carrot or stick. Even worse is the idea of the great unwashed masses looking out for their best interests by working together, they have to be reliant on getting rewarded only when they benefit their leaders. While independence is seen as annoying, interdependence is seen as revolt.
The thing that pisses off those who control us the most is when we don't follow, when we choose for ourselves and are in agreement and don't give them the answer they want. For the first time in a long time we have two candidates who are not controlled by the controllers of this world, Trump and Sanders, and you know what they will not be allowed to win. I would bet money in Vegas on that right this second. Neither will be President. The winner is probably going to be Clinton. If the Republican party sabotages Trump, I guarantee that a lot of Republicans will leave the party. Parties have died before, you don't see too many Tory's anymore. If Trump gets the nomination and loses to Clinton the Republican's will blame it on their members who voted for Trump in the primaries.
Now here is where life could get really interesting. What if Trump won the Republican nomination for President, accepted it and then ran as an Independent. If he did that, he would beat Clinton because Democrats would feel better about voting for an Independent than a Republican. Now that would be truly interesting. I do not expect Trump to run as a third party; but, if he won the parties nomination and then ran as an independent anyways, he would win. Heck, if he actually did it the way I have outlined, congress; both Democrats and Republicans, would have to vote for his policies out of fear of losing their seats in the next election.
Friday, November 20, 2015
Syrian Refugees and Stupidity.
Huffington Post - Mayor Wonders If We Need WWII-Style Internment Camps After Paris Attacks. Ok so this mayor and the other politicians it discusses are complete and utter idiots and fascists. You do not get to say you defend the Constitution and then put people who have not been found guilty of anything in jail or an internment camp. What this country did to the Japanese was the most illegal thing this country has ever done. You might think slavery was the worst thing we have done or even the killing of the Indians; but, those things were actually legal. They may have been worse; but, they were legal and that is a separate issue.
Huffington Post - Jeb Bush: Let's Focus On Helping The Christian Syrian Refugees, Rather Than The Muslims. I guess if we really want to play it safe we will only allow gay atheists in the country as they have more to fear from ISIS than any other group.
Huffington Post - Ben Carson Compares Some Refugees To Rabid Dogs. Ever since the attacks in Paris a lot of Republicans have been spouting very anti-Muslim nonsense. The United States supported a civil war in Syria and now there are people trying to leave that country, what a surprise. Every Muslim is not a fanatic anymore than every Christian bombs abortion clinics. Extremists gravitate towards religious dogma because it justifies their actions in their minds. They just blame their actions on God.
Huffington Post - Jeb Bush: Let's Focus On Helping The Christian Syrian Refugees, Rather Than The Muslims. I guess if we really want to play it safe we will only allow gay atheists in the country as they have more to fear from ISIS than any other group.
Huffington Post - Ben Carson Compares Some Refugees To Rabid Dogs. Ever since the attacks in Paris a lot of Republicans have been spouting very anti-Muslim nonsense. The United States supported a civil war in Syria and now there are people trying to leave that country, what a surprise. Every Muslim is not a fanatic anymore than every Christian bombs abortion clinics. Extremists gravitate towards religious dogma because it justifies their actions in their minds. They just blame their actions on God.
Thursday, November 19, 2015
Pastor Carol Daniels - 2015 - Letter to a Newspaper
YouTube - New details uncovered in murder of Anadarko pastor.
I noticed a big increase in blot hits which used the search term "Pastor Carol Daniels" in the last couple of days and then some of them also searched for a letter. A search on the net did not bring up any newspaper articles so I searched YouTube and found the above news report. Apparently about a year ago a letter was received at a local newspaper that suggested a number of disturbing reasons why Daniels may have been killed. As a result of this the OSBI is actively looking at the case again. As far as I can tell the letter has not been released to the public.
If the letter had said that it was from the killer it would be considered evidence; but, the reliability would still be in question; however, nothing in the report claims that the writer of the letter confessed to anything. My takeaway from all of this is that the OSBI is still looking into the case. I doubt the letter proved useful as they have had it for a year according to the report. Then again, we don't know what else they may have discovered and their is always hope. I am making this post just to make it easier for people who are following this case to stay current.
UPDATE:
Here is another link to the video; but, this one has a transcript. Apparently a woman who was in jail was questioned though we do not know what she said. What I found interesting was when the head of the OSBI said that, "the killer could be in Anadarko, the killer could be anywhere in Oklahoma". What he did not say is that the person could be anywhere in the United States and could in fact still be in Anadarko. That is interesting because it means that they in fact have someone or some specific people in mind. Remember Anadarko is a very small town with only about 6,500 residents.
I noticed a big increase in blot hits which used the search term "Pastor Carol Daniels" in the last couple of days and then some of them also searched for a letter. A search on the net did not bring up any newspaper articles so I searched YouTube and found the above news report. Apparently about a year ago a letter was received at a local newspaper that suggested a number of disturbing reasons why Daniels may have been killed. As a result of this the OSBI is actively looking at the case again. As far as I can tell the letter has not been released to the public.
If the letter had said that it was from the killer it would be considered evidence; but, the reliability would still be in question; however, nothing in the report claims that the writer of the letter confessed to anything. My takeaway from all of this is that the OSBI is still looking into the case. I doubt the letter proved useful as they have had it for a year according to the report. Then again, we don't know what else they may have discovered and their is always hope. I am making this post just to make it easier for people who are following this case to stay current.
UPDATE:
Here is another link to the video; but, this one has a transcript. Apparently a woman who was in jail was questioned though we do not know what she said. What I found interesting was when the head of the OSBI said that, "the killer could be in Anadarko, the killer could be anywhere in Oklahoma". What he did not say is that the person could be anywhere in the United States and could in fact still be in Anadarko. That is interesting because it means that they in fact have someone or some specific people in mind. Remember Anadarko is a very small town with only about 6,500 residents.
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Dr. Demento and the Power of Laughter
For years I thought I first heard Dr Demento on the California State University Northridge radio station. From what I have read it was actually on a Pasadena radio station. That is also in the San Fernando Valley area. The station was KPPC and from what I read tonight it was considered "underground" at the time. He didn't stay there long and in 1971 he went to KMET another local station. After moving to KMET he played more comedy novelty songs and less just old and odd blues songs. In 1974 Dr Demento went national in syndication. He went into even bigger distribution by 1978; but, by then I had moved from the area. The truth of the matter is that I listened to Dr Demento before he had his big break and real national fame. I treasure the memory of his beginnings.
When I was a tween, Sundays were spent listening to comedy songs and funky old blues with Dr Demento telling us stories about the history of the music. I will get back to the Doctor; but, please enjoy these humorous links. We need more humorous songs and more silliness to put up with the harshness that seems to be modern life. Be well and enjoy.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e1 The Apartment Hunt.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e2 Job Interview.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e3 Internet Date.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e4 Dog Walker.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e5 One Night Stand.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e6 Planned Parenthood.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e1 Babysitting.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e2 Driver's Ed.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e3 Wednesday vs Catcallers.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e4 The Haircut.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e5 The Reality Star.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e6 The Flea Market,
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e7 True Love Season Finale.
YouTube - Ghouls Night In.
YouTube - Dead Puppies.
YouTube - NBC Playground - Wolfgirl.
When I was a tween, Sundays were spent listening to comedy songs and funky old blues with Dr Demento telling us stories about the history of the music. I will get back to the Doctor; but, please enjoy these humorous links. We need more humorous songs and more silliness to put up with the harshness that seems to be modern life. Be well and enjoy.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e1 The Apartment Hunt.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e2 Job Interview.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e3 Internet Date.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e4 Dog Walker.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e5 One Night Stand.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s1e6 Planned Parenthood.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e1 Babysitting.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e2 Driver's Ed.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e3 Wednesday vs Catcallers.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e4 The Haircut.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e5 The Reality Star.
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e6 The Flea Market,
YouTube - Adult Wednesday Addams s2e7 True Love Season Finale.
YouTube - Ghouls Night In.
YouTube - Dead Puppies.
YouTube - NBC Playground - Wolfgirl.
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Number of Hits and Garbage
This blog has somewhere around 76,000 hits. It took two months for me to get 500 hits a month and at my highest readership I got around 2,200 hits a month. Right now I am getting about 1,400 a month. It sounds pitiful compared to commercial sites and sites dedicated to video games. LOL. Someone asked me once in a comment if I was doing this to make money. Oh my, if this was how I made my money I would have starved to death years ago. Even if I had adds on this site, what would I have made, a buck and a quarter? $76? LOL.
No matter what you are interested in, I am not a subject matter based person, the subjects change on a daily basis. It is not a personality based blog as I never identify myself. It is not a friendly blog as I am usually calling out the establishment for trying to lead us wherever they think we should be. My single most read post had about 2,500 different readers. That is not much in a world where Justin Bieber gets millions of hits in a day. Nope this is not a viral blog. It probably never will be and was never intended to be such. Having said what I have, imagine speaking before 2,500 people in one day. I have actually done that. I have literally spoken in front of a couple thousand people at one time. You don't have to speak to the world to be heard and if you start a blog and get 500 hits on one post, think of it like speaking before an audience of 500 people. If your average audience per month is 500 people, that is amazing. If you have a story to tell, create a blog and then fill it daily or regularly with whatever you believe you have to add to the life conversation. You don't need to go viral.
Do you understand that everything you do online is a message that is read and I don't mean literally. Every view to a porn site is logged, it matters little which site. If people spend 90% of their time online playing games or buying stuff then it is clear that they are not worried about what is going on in the world and don't worry about the truth or news or anything truly important. That is tracked. Our stats for using the internet are tracked to understand what we are interested in, not individually; but, as a group. Look up what is "trending" on the internet and you understand what it's users care about.
No matter what you are interested in, I am not a subject matter based person, the subjects change on a daily basis. It is not a personality based blog as I never identify myself. It is not a friendly blog as I am usually calling out the establishment for trying to lead us wherever they think we should be. My single most read post had about 2,500 different readers. That is not much in a world where Justin Bieber gets millions of hits in a day. Nope this is not a viral blog. It probably never will be and was never intended to be such. Having said what I have, imagine speaking before 2,500 people in one day. I have actually done that. I have literally spoken in front of a couple thousand people at one time. You don't have to speak to the world to be heard and if you start a blog and get 500 hits on one post, think of it like speaking before an audience of 500 people. If your average audience per month is 500 people, that is amazing. If you have a story to tell, create a blog and then fill it daily or regularly with whatever you believe you have to add to the life conversation. You don't need to go viral.
Do you understand that everything you do online is a message that is read and I don't mean literally. Every view to a porn site is logged, it matters little which site. If people spend 90% of their time online playing games or buying stuff then it is clear that they are not worried about what is going on in the world and don't worry about the truth or news or anything truly important. That is tracked. Our stats for using the internet are tracked to understand what we are interested in, not individually; but, as a group. Look up what is "trending" on the internet and you understand what it's users care about.
Sunday, November 15, 2015
Bill Cosby's Daughter and Mike Tyson
I don't know what caused me to remember this; but, I am surprised that nobody else has brought it up in light of the accusations that Bill Cosby has raped multiple women after drugging them. Back in the early 1990s Mike Tyson was accused of violence against women and having raped some women. In fact, Tyson was convicted of rape in 1992, was sentenced to six years and served three years.
Well, back in 1991 or so Erinn Cosby went on the Phil Donahue show to discuss how she had been raped by Mike Tyson. Her claim was that Bill Cosby, her father, convinced her to not charge him with a crime and instead convinced Tyson to seek out counseling. In light of what has since been reveled about Bill Cosby it is interesting how he dealt with his daughters rape.
YouTube - Bill Cosby's daughter, Erinn, talks sexual assault by Mike Tyson; relationship with father.
Well, back in 1991 or so Erinn Cosby went on the Phil Donahue show to discuss how she had been raped by Mike Tyson. Her claim was that Bill Cosby, her father, convinced her to not charge him with a crime and instead convinced Tyson to seek out counseling. In light of what has since been reveled about Bill Cosby it is interesting how he dealt with his daughters rape.
YouTube - Bill Cosby's daughter, Erinn, talks sexual assault by Mike Tyson; relationship with father.
Saturday, November 14, 2015
Vatican Mysteries That Are Not
We all like a good conspiracy theory and not all are just theories. Truth is we were tricked into Vietnam after being told American ships were attacked in the Golf of Tonkin and that was a lie. We were also tricked into Iraq after being told they had mass weapons of destruction. Heck, for years people who thought the Bildergerg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Tri-Lateral Commission met in secret to discuss worldwide approaches to common problems was non-sense. Well, they do meet in secret, you don't know what is discussed and they are pretty open about it now. As for how serious these conspiracies can get, giving LSD to adults without their knowledge, testing spreading viruses through the New York subway system and giving children cereal that was radioactive, yeah, those things were all done by the CIA and have been documented by the United States government. If you doubt it, you might want to go to the congressional website and look up the church committee. But, just because some conspiracies are real does not mean that all of them are or even that all of the stories get the real story straight.
One popular conspiracy theory for the past decade or so was by Dan Brown and it is the idea that Jesus had a baby with Mary Magdalene and that the truth is being hidden by the Vatican in it's "Secret Library". In case you have read this nonsense as anything more than a decent book and a couple of mediocre movies, let me explain a few things.
Firstly, the library is not secret, it is restricted. This is very common for libraries holding original documents from antiquity. In fact many libraries are limited to people having Masters or Doctorate degrees. I know, I have visited one of them at a major university. Secondly, the requirements to look at or even touch these books can be quite limited as they do not wish the books to age anymore than can be avoided. Lighting, air, temperature, moisture and other things can all increase the decay of these books and that is why they are often protected in the same way as some of the greatest art treasures.
The Vatican has well over a million documents and books that are kept protected in their non-public library. The odds are that even they do not know what is in all of the books and papers. Lets not forget that the Dead Sea Scrolls are still being deciphered and we have had those for decades. The value of some of these documents is incalculable. Thieves would love to get in there; but, it is very well guarded.
Now Dan Brown and others have repeated an old gnostic (read heretical) theory that Jesus and Magdalene had a child and that it is being hidden because Jesus having a child would destroy his perception of divinity. At first blush this sounds vaguely reasonable until you consider the fact that God is Jesus' father with the virgin Mary and that is how Jesus came into being. We are all God's creation, why would a physical relationship matter when we were all physically created by him. You don't have to agree with the theology. The point is that anyone that knows the bible well would not be bothered at all if Jesus had kids. Other than the Catholic church most churches allow their pastors to marry. Another equally dumb theory is that the Vatican is hiding evidence of aliens. Again sounds vaguely plausible except that these are all ancient documents not modern day photographs. The bible itself talks about lights in the sky and the Vatican's answer is angels. What definitive document from the 1300s could exist that would prove aliens from another planet and be accepted as being correct. Modern people didn't even believe stories by sailors in the 1400s of giant squid until we filmed them in the last few years.
YouTube - What Is The Vatican Hiding In Its Archives?
The truth is that we don't get told the whole story about many things by the government. The U.S. and all countries hide a lot of things from the public especially the things they did that would be considered evil. It is equally true that industry does not tell us things like their plans for the future. Insider trading is very common on Wall Street and future technologies are regularly hidden by the government and private industry.
One popular conspiracy theory for the past decade or so was by Dan Brown and it is the idea that Jesus had a baby with Mary Magdalene and that the truth is being hidden by the Vatican in it's "Secret Library". In case you have read this nonsense as anything more than a decent book and a couple of mediocre movies, let me explain a few things.
Firstly, the library is not secret, it is restricted. This is very common for libraries holding original documents from antiquity. In fact many libraries are limited to people having Masters or Doctorate degrees. I know, I have visited one of them at a major university. Secondly, the requirements to look at or even touch these books can be quite limited as they do not wish the books to age anymore than can be avoided. Lighting, air, temperature, moisture and other things can all increase the decay of these books and that is why they are often protected in the same way as some of the greatest art treasures.
The Vatican has well over a million documents and books that are kept protected in their non-public library. The odds are that even they do not know what is in all of the books and papers. Lets not forget that the Dead Sea Scrolls are still being deciphered and we have had those for decades. The value of some of these documents is incalculable. Thieves would love to get in there; but, it is very well guarded.
Now Dan Brown and others have repeated an old gnostic (read heretical) theory that Jesus and Magdalene had a child and that it is being hidden because Jesus having a child would destroy his perception of divinity. At first blush this sounds vaguely reasonable until you consider the fact that God is Jesus' father with the virgin Mary and that is how Jesus came into being. We are all God's creation, why would a physical relationship matter when we were all physically created by him. You don't have to agree with the theology. The point is that anyone that knows the bible well would not be bothered at all if Jesus had kids. Other than the Catholic church most churches allow their pastors to marry. Another equally dumb theory is that the Vatican is hiding evidence of aliens. Again sounds vaguely plausible except that these are all ancient documents not modern day photographs. The bible itself talks about lights in the sky and the Vatican's answer is angels. What definitive document from the 1300s could exist that would prove aliens from another planet and be accepted as being correct. Modern people didn't even believe stories by sailors in the 1400s of giant squid until we filmed them in the last few years.
YouTube - What Is The Vatican Hiding In Its Archives?
The truth is that we don't get told the whole story about many things by the government. The U.S. and all countries hide a lot of things from the public especially the things they did that would be considered evil. It is equally true that industry does not tell us things like their plans for the future. Insider trading is very common on Wall Street and future technologies are regularly hidden by the government and private industry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)