Gonzales and Wolfowitz ... and how many before those two? Like, "Heckuva job, Brownie."
Bush says, "I'm the commander guy."
You can't make this stuff up!
If you line up mug shots of Karl Rove, Kyle Sampson, and Tim Griffin (with his glasses on) and you get three peas in a pod of pudgy buddies.
I mean, c'mon, folks!
They were politicizing the JUSTICE Department ... and what was the Republican response? It's done all the time!
Gimme a break!
We need to get out the "Impeach Bleach" and clean the rot out of the Bush 43 administration. We may be holding our noses now, but at this rate we will be gagging and retching at the stench by January, 2009, when the new president takes over ... if we don't clean the mess up.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
The new economics - Post 8
Globalization: a ploy to reduce the cost of labor
Labor rights are a major issue in globalization and expose the brilliant idiocy of many global economists. Globalization for them is—among other things—a ploy to reduce the cost of labor in the industrialized west.
The irrational nature of this ploy pertaining to labor in the current conventional wisdom on global economics is exposed by the rational concept that equilibrium is reached between two or more fluid materials/situations (multiple transactions in bounded settings) at the LOWEST level IF the pull of "gravity" is toward the lowest level achievable, i.e. lowest cost.
Lowest cost is the "gravity" of the individual transaction or microeconomic event because the "buyer" is the actor—the individual who decides whether or not to act (or buy)—and given the opportunity to get more or less of the same thing for a given "price" will rationally choose to get more, i.e., buy at a lower price.
Think of it as two barrels filled with fluid and kept separate for a time. One fills up faster than the other. Now, connect them so they can reach equal levels ... it is patently obvious that the higher one will come down. Now think of the one that had the higher level as a 55 gallon drum and the one that had the lower level as a 5500 gallon tank ... the previous higher level is going to come WAY down.
Does anyone really wonder what is happening between the United States and China regarding workers’ wages?
Labor is more than just a commodity. It is how we think about ourselves and how we connect to our communities and make our contribution. We have a right to be treated fairly and equitably.
If we treat our labor simply as a commodity, simply to be purchased rationally at the lowest possible price, we effectively erode our society. This is because we do not have a system for updating the costs of maintaining the worker above the basics of minimum food, shelter, and clothing. Our current mechanism of determining the cost of labor on the global market, drives it down to slave wages, or the cost of having a human mule.
We need to move forward to a new understanding of how markets work. Old theories are out of date ... both free market capitalism and central control socialism.
Labor rights are a major issue in globalization and expose the brilliant idiocy of many global economists. Globalization for them is—among other things—a ploy to reduce the cost of labor in the industrialized west.
The irrational nature of this ploy pertaining to labor in the current conventional wisdom on global economics is exposed by the rational concept that equilibrium is reached between two or more fluid materials/situations (multiple transactions in bounded settings) at the LOWEST level IF the pull of "gravity" is toward the lowest level achievable, i.e. lowest cost.
Lowest cost is the "gravity" of the individual transaction or microeconomic event because the "buyer" is the actor—the individual who decides whether or not to act (or buy)—and given the opportunity to get more or less of the same thing for a given "price" will rationally choose to get more, i.e., buy at a lower price.
Think of it as two barrels filled with fluid and kept separate for a time. One fills up faster than the other. Now, connect them so they can reach equal levels ... it is patently obvious that the higher one will come down. Now think of the one that had the higher level as a 55 gallon drum and the one that had the lower level as a 5500 gallon tank ... the previous higher level is going to come WAY down.
Does anyone really wonder what is happening between the United States and China regarding workers’ wages?
Labor is more than just a commodity. It is how we think about ourselves and how we connect to our communities and make our contribution. We have a right to be treated fairly and equitably.
If we treat our labor simply as a commodity, simply to be purchased rationally at the lowest possible price, we effectively erode our society. This is because we do not have a system for updating the costs of maintaining the worker above the basics of minimum food, shelter, and clothing. Our current mechanism of determining the cost of labor on the global market, drives it down to slave wages, or the cost of having a human mule.
We need to move forward to a new understanding of how markets work. Old theories are out of date ... both free market capitalism and central control socialism.
Mind mirrors matter
There you have it, the mind mirrors matter. Actually, life mirrors non-life.
In the orderly recurrence of relational events, life is able to establish itself as the effect of these orderly recurring relational events, becoming a bounded set of same ... a lifeform.
Mind then becomes the etching of same as if a stylus was recording the contours of a figure on a drawing ... the etching of events within and without the boundary of the lifeform ... within the lifeform in a manner in which they can be "remembered" ... which is to say, the etchings can be retraced.
More to come ...
In the orderly recurrence of relational events, life is able to establish itself as the effect of these orderly recurring relational events, becoming a bounded set of same ... a lifeform.
Mind then becomes the etching of same as if a stylus was recording the contours of a figure on a drawing ... the etching of events within and without the boundary of the lifeform ... within the lifeform in a manner in which they can be "remembered" ... which is to say, the etchings can be retraced.
More to come ...
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
The new economics - Post 7
Does free trade and globalization work? Depends on the objective. Are we talking amassing owned wealth for the few or creating a resource-rich community of nations for the many?
One thing it does NOT do is preserve higher labor costs for work that can be performed somewhere else at a lower labor cost. But, you might say, that is rational. But, I would counter, it is not rational if rationally determined ethical values (labor rights) regulate one labor source and laissez-faire values regulate the competing source of labor. Slavery, child labor, or 72 hour work weeks should not be options for civilized trading partners. (For that matter, neither should global pollution be an option.)
Another point—it would seem to me—is that in a fluid situation where a commodity such as labor cost is free to flow between disparate settings, equilibrium will be achieved at the lowest common level ... all else being equal. Here the "gravity" factor is the tendency for the buyer of a commodity to seek the lowest price ... all else being equal.
For the life of me, I cannot understand how Democrats let Bill Clinton pursue globalization, giving up our market leverage that could have been applied to rational labor rights and environmental regulations in the trade agreements. Except that Bill was never a democrat (small "d") but rather a moderate (Rockefeller) Republican.
One thing it does NOT do is preserve higher labor costs for work that can be performed somewhere else at a lower labor cost. But, you might say, that is rational. But, I would counter, it is not rational if rationally determined ethical values (labor rights) regulate one labor source and laissez-faire values regulate the competing source of labor. Slavery, child labor, or 72 hour work weeks should not be options for civilized trading partners. (For that matter, neither should global pollution be an option.)
Another point—it would seem to me—is that in a fluid situation where a commodity such as labor cost is free to flow between disparate settings, equilibrium will be achieved at the lowest common level ... all else being equal. Here the "gravity" factor is the tendency for the buyer of a commodity to seek the lowest price ... all else being equal.
For the life of me, I cannot understand how Democrats let Bill Clinton pursue globalization, giving up our market leverage that could have been applied to rational labor rights and environmental regulations in the trade agreements. Except that Bill was never a democrat (small "d") but rather a moderate (Rockefeller) Republican.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
HuffPo comments for Tuesday, April 17
French Intelligence Warned CIA Of Al-Qaeda Hijack Plot In Early '01
"Everyone knew that something was cooking, that these people were preparing something big and spectacular," Alain Chouet, former chief of the security intelligence service at the DGSE, told AP. "Our American colleagues knew, our European colleagues knew, everyone did. But nobody had a hint it would happen inside the United States _ on the contrary."
Excuse me, but you might say there was a hint contained in the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the United States." After which President Bush told the briefer, "Okay, you have covered your a--." I guess the French intelligence was just one more clue ignored. No wonder Condi Rice, then National Security Advisor, was scheduled to give a major speech on September 11, 2001, on the urgent need for a ballistic missile defense. Of course, that speech never happened.
By: GabrielOak on April 16, 2007 at 06:39pm
And remembering back to the summer of '01 and the military-industrial hype for the ballistic missile defense system(shield) ... then considering the "Shock and Awe" strategy of "rapid dominance" ... plus ... and ... plus ... and we can see the picture that here is a group of brilliant idiots whose only reality is their own delusions of alpha-hood.
I'm going to have watch DR. STRANGELOVE again ... I'm getting the creepy feeling that the neocons stole the script without giving proper credit.
By: hglindquist on April 17, 2007 at 09:45am
"Everyone knew that something was cooking, that these people were preparing something big and spectacular," Alain Chouet, former chief of the security intelligence service at the DGSE, told AP. "Our American colleagues knew, our European colleagues knew, everyone did. But nobody had a hint it would happen inside the United States _ on the contrary."
Excuse me, but you might say there was a hint contained in the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the United States." After which President Bush told the briefer, "Okay, you have covered your a--." I guess the French intelligence was just one more clue ignored. No wonder Condi Rice, then National Security Advisor, was scheduled to give a major speech on September 11, 2001, on the urgent need for a ballistic missile defense. Of course, that speech never happened.
By: GabrielOak on April 16, 2007 at 06:39pm
And remembering back to the summer of '01 and the military-industrial hype for the ballistic missile defense system(shield) ... then considering the "Shock and Awe" strategy of "rapid dominance" ... plus ... and ... plus ... and we can see the picture that here is a group of brilliant idiots whose only reality is their own delusions of alpha-hood.
I'm going to have watch DR. STRANGELOVE again ... I'm getting the creepy feeling that the neocons stole the script without giving proper credit.
By: hglindquist on April 17, 2007 at 09:45am
Monday, April 09, 2007
How are we absurd? Let me count another way ... Post 2
Imus slanders the Rutgers women's basket ball team on MSNBC ... and keeps his job as of today.
A little six year old black girl is arrested and booked as a felon in Florida ...
We have become absurd ...
Don Imus has apologized�and has put his apology at the top of his web site�for calling the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos" after they lost in the NCAA finals.
Just when it didn't seem possible, Imus, host of MSNBC's "Imus in the Morning," managed to reach a new low. While discussing the NCAA women's basketball game between Rutgers University and the University of Tennessee, Imus openly described the team, which has eight black and two white women on it, as "nappy-headed hos" after the show's producer, Bernard McGuirk, called the team "hardcore hos."
A little six year old black girl is arrested and booked as a felon in Florida ...
When 6-year-old Desre’e Watson threw a tantrum in her kindergarten class a couple of weeks ago she could not have known that the full force of the law would be brought down on her and that she would be carted off by the police as a felon.
But that’s what happened in this small, backward city in central Florida. According to the authorities, there were no other options.Bob Herbert
6-Year-Olds Under Arrest
April 9, 2007
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/opinion/09herbert.htm
We have become absurd ...
Sunday, April 08, 2007
The new economics - Post 6
We should take what we have learned from Capitalism, Communism, and Socialism and move on to a new economics system based on a rational market.
What do I mean by a "rational" market? A rational understanding of the world typically means that we understand the cause and effect relationship of events. If the temperature of water drops below 0 degrees Centigrade/ 32 degrees Fahrenheit then the water freezes.
In a market in order to produce goods or services to sell or exchange, the producer/seller has to use a given set of resources and thereby incurs what should be the costs of bringing the goods and services to market. These "costs" are the "cause" of the "effect" of having goods or services to sell or exchange in a market. A market is rational to the extent that the costs (cause) are paid for out of the selling price (effect) of the market, as one factor.
We know from experience that the traditional market is not efficient in matching all costs incurred in producing given goods and services to the selling prices of those goods and services; and therefore some costs are left out of the current market price system (euphemistically called the free market or free price system). These costs not included are called "externalities". Examples of externalities are the cancer caused by second-hand cigarette smoke, the excavating and dumping of mountaintops into valleys and streams to get at coal seams in the mountains, and the dumping of dioxin in the Delaware and Hudson Rivers--to name but three.
It really doesn't take a rocket scientist of an economist to figure this stuff out, yet we have had these brilliant idiots foisting the benefits of free market globalization off on us unsuspecting laypersons at least since Eisenhower became president.
It doesn't take a higher level equation to prove the free market economists wrong, simple common sense will do. The key thread to pull on to unravel their gossamer theory is the concept of "The Invisible Hand". Anyone who abandons rational skepticism for some god-like mechanism has already identified themselves as a flim-flam faker in the post-enlightenment world. (Yes, I understand that's a little hard to swallow for some folks.)
Do we still believe that whirlpools or tornadoes are the work of an angry God? Do we believe that pouring sand through a funnel and having it fall into a cone shaped mound is the work of an Invisible Hand?
What is more, is the whirlpool the ocean? Is the tornado the sky?
What do I mean by a "rational" market? A rational understanding of the world typically means that we understand the cause and effect relationship of events. If the temperature of water drops below 0 degrees Centigrade/ 32 degrees Fahrenheit then the water freezes.
In a market in order to produce goods or services to sell or exchange, the producer/seller has to use a given set of resources and thereby incurs what should be the costs of bringing the goods and services to market. These "costs" are the "cause" of the "effect" of having goods or services to sell or exchange in a market. A market is rational to the extent that the costs (cause) are paid for out of the selling price (effect) of the market, as one factor.
We know from experience that the traditional market is not efficient in matching all costs incurred in producing given goods and services to the selling prices of those goods and services; and therefore some costs are left out of the current market price system (euphemistically called the free market or free price system). These costs not included are called "externalities". Examples of externalities are the cancer caused by second-hand cigarette smoke, the excavating and dumping of mountaintops into valleys and streams to get at coal seams in the mountains, and the dumping of dioxin in the Delaware and Hudson Rivers--to name but three.
It really doesn't take a rocket scientist of an economist to figure this stuff out, yet we have had these brilliant idiots foisting the benefits of free market globalization off on us unsuspecting laypersons at least since Eisenhower became president.
It doesn't take a higher level equation to prove the free market economists wrong, simple common sense will do. The key thread to pull on to unravel their gossamer theory is the concept of "The Invisible Hand". Anyone who abandons rational skepticism for some god-like mechanism has already identified themselves as a flim-flam faker in the post-enlightenment world. (Yes, I understand that's a little hard to swallow for some folks.)
Do we still believe that whirlpools or tornadoes are the work of an angry God? Do we believe that pouring sand through a funnel and having it fall into a cone shaped mound is the work of an Invisible Hand?
What is more, is the whirlpool the ocean? Is the tornado the sky?
Friday, April 06, 2007
Cheney as the Queen of Hearts ...
Cheney Reasserts al-Qaida-Saddam Link
WASHINGTON — Vice President Dick Cheney repeated his assertions of al-Qaida links to Saddam Hussein's Iraq on Thursday as the Defense Department released a report citing more evidence that the prewar government did not cooperate with the terrorist group.
ALICE'S ADVENTURES IN WONDERLAND
by Lewis Carroll
THE QUEEN'S CROQUET-GROUND
A large rose-tree stood near the entrance of the garden: the roses growing on it were white, but there were three gardeners at it, busily painting them red. Alice thought this a very curious thing, and she went nearer to watch them, and just as she came up to them she heard one of them say, `Look out now, Five! Don't go splashing paint over me like that!'
`I couldn't help it,' said Five, in a sulky tone; `Seven jogged my elbow.'
On which Seven looked up and said, `That's right, Five! Always lay the blame on others!'
`You'd better not talk!'said Five. `I heard the Queen say only yesterday you deserved to be beheaded!'
`What for?' said the one who had spoken first.
`That's none of your business, Two!' said Seven.
`Yes, it is his business!' said Five, `and I'll tell him--it was for bringing the cook tulip-roots instead of onions.'
Seven flung down his brush, and had just begun `Well, of all the unjust things--' when his eye chanced to fall upon Alice, as she stood watching them, and he checked himself suddenly: the others looked round also, and all of them bowed low.
`Would you tell me,' said Alice, a little timidly, `why you are painting those roses?'
Five and Seven said nothing, but looked at Two. Two began in a low voice, `Why the fact is, you see, Miss, this here ought to have been a red rose-tree, and we put a white one in by mistake; and if the Queen was to find it out, we should all have our heads cut off, you know. So you see, Miss, we're doing our best, afore she comes, to--'
Do I have to tell anyone how much the Queen of Hearts reminds me Vice President Cheney?
Paint the white roses red ...
We have become absurd.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Comments on the War in Iraq ... Thursday, April 5
And we are supposed to continue the surge because General Petraeus knows what he is doing and he has confidence ... confidence in what? that the surge MIGHT work? That's the confidence of a general who wants another star and needs a ticket punch.
Petraeus has also said that there is NO military solution. So is this a training exercise for our field grade and higher officers?
I mean, what the hell is going on? The charge of the light brigade? Gallipoli? What delusion grips our brilliant idiots along with our plain old dumb ones as leaders to the point that we send ill-equipped, ill-prepared youth into battle?
At least if there were a draft there would be SOME kind of shared sacrifice ... but if the children of the rich and powerful had to go, we wouldn't be having this war would we?
The leaders our nation should be following are Congressmen Charles Rangel and John Murtha ... men who personally know what shared sacrifice in the time of war is all about.
...
A quote I like:
It was and still is absurd to think we could pacify Iraq with the size of occupation force we used. Generals Colin Powell, Eric Shinseki, and Anthony Zinni all said the same thing, to quote Zinni:
It is time we the people took our nation back.
Petraeus has also said that there is NO military solution. So is this a training exercise for our field grade and higher officers?
I mean, what the hell is going on? The charge of the light brigade? Gallipoli? What delusion grips our brilliant idiots along with our plain old dumb ones as leaders to the point that we send ill-equipped, ill-prepared youth into battle?
At least if there were a draft there would be SOME kind of shared sacrifice ... but if the children of the rich and powerful had to go, we wouldn't be having this war would we?
The leaders our nation should be following are Congressmen Charles Rangel and John Murtha ... men who personally know what shared sacrifice in the time of war is all about.
...
A quote I like:
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"I have been writing for some time now that we are absurd as a nation.-Voltaire.
It was and still is absurd to think we could pacify Iraq with the size of occupation force we used. Generals Colin Powell, Eric Shinseki, and Anthony Zinni all said the same thing, to quote Zinni:
"I think it was clear they underestimated what they were going to face in the aftermath of the war. They didn't have sufficient planning for some of the problems they would face in major reconstruction of a country so centrally controlled and dominated by one figure and also had control of the institutions."The generals who went along with the neocons' absurd wild-eyed dreams and schemes are not only responsible for the military debacle that has unfolded for more now more than four years but also for the atrocities of Abu Garib (for starters).
It is time we the people took our nation back.
The new economics - Post 5
Let's hear it for The Invisible Hand ...
Are you kidding me? Whatever happened to the concept of skeptical review of speculation ... and speculation is all that any belief really is. (What? Of course I am an existentialist. Why do you ask?)
Some background from wikipedia.com:
What is more, a market or price system just doesn't spring miraculously into existence. It arises, layer by layer, on an emerging system of economics within a community of people ... and while that foundation may seem permanent, it isn't. It needs to be renewed generation after generation by educating each new generation, by maintaining and enhancing infrastructure, by building on what we have without allowing the foundation to deteriorate. If these costs aren't paid, the system is not maintained and it collapses ... sooner or later.
It is this community system as a foundation that is the platform for individual performance. Even if "the sky's the limit", launching oneself from a swamp or a crumbling deck is not the best way to reach the sky.
The simple facts of people paying their bills on time, of obeying traffic laws so trucks can move goods, of sending their kids to school each day and all that goes with that effort ... and yes, even being willing to suffer the indignity of welfare rather than resort to robbery ... all this and more that people do in working to make a community work economically ... can dissolve into a Hobbesian jungle or an autocratic dictatorship before our very eyes if people lose faith in the ability of their community to provide economic justice, to be treat them fairly in return for their effort and commitment.
What do you think it is going to be like around here when people wake up to the fact that our brilliant idiots in charge of economic policy have given away our labor rights so they can live in mansions?
Note: My god, there are those who still think Clinton was a democrat (small "d")! He was and is a Rockefeller Republican. Get real, folks.
Are you kidding me? Whatever happened to the concept of skeptical review of speculation ... and speculation is all that any belief really is. (What? Of course I am an existentialist. Why do you ask?)
Some background from wikipedia.com:
The invisible hand is a metaphor coined by Adam Smith to illustrate how those who seek wealth by following their individual self-interest, inadvertently stimulate the economy and assist society as a whole. In the general opinion, in The Wealth of Nations and other writings, Smith claims that, in capitalism, an individual pursuing his own good tends also to promote the good of his community, through a principle that he called “the invisible hand” of the market, which ensures that those activities most beneficial and efficient will naturally be those that are most profitable. The specific mechanism for this, Smith saw as being the free price system.The biggest problem with Adam Smith's conjecture is that there is no such thing as a "free price system" BECAUSE individuals are unwilling (under the dictum of the invisible hand to pursue self-interest) to give up any advantage that skews the market in their favor. In other words, they are unwilling to pay all the costs incurred in "earning" their profits. Economists call these costs left unpaid "externalities", and aptly so so because while they exist, they are external to the price system. For instance, cancer caused by second-hand cigarette smoke, or the digging up and dumping of mountaintops into valleys and streams below to get at coal seams, are externalities.
What is more, a market or price system just doesn't spring miraculously into existence. It arises, layer by layer, on an emerging system of economics within a community of people ... and while that foundation may seem permanent, it isn't. It needs to be renewed generation after generation by educating each new generation, by maintaining and enhancing infrastructure, by building on what we have without allowing the foundation to deteriorate. If these costs aren't paid, the system is not maintained and it collapses ... sooner or later.
It is this community system as a foundation that is the platform for individual performance. Even if "the sky's the limit", launching oneself from a swamp or a crumbling deck is not the best way to reach the sky.
The simple facts of people paying their bills on time, of obeying traffic laws so trucks can move goods, of sending their kids to school each day and all that goes with that effort ... and yes, even being willing to suffer the indignity of welfare rather than resort to robbery ... all this and more that people do in working to make a community work economically ... can dissolve into a Hobbesian jungle or an autocratic dictatorship before our very eyes if people lose faith in the ability of their community to provide economic justice, to be treat them fairly in return for their effort and commitment.
What do you think it is going to be like around here when people wake up to the fact that our brilliant idiots in charge of economic policy have given away our labor rights so they can live in mansions?
Note: My god, there are those who still think Clinton was a democrat (small "d")! He was and is a Rockefeller Republican. Get real, folks.
How are we absurd? Let me count another way ...
The corporate monopolists/neocons in control of our nation have abandoned the pursuit of self-criticism for the pursuit of self-interest. Self-interest trumps truth.
Bob Herbert, NY Times OpEd columnist, in his column today titled "Our Crumbling Foundation", writes:
Herbert continues:
ab·surd /æbˈsɜrd, -ˈzɜrd/ -adjective
1.utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 05 Apr. 2007. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/absurd>.
Bob Herbert, NY Times OpEd columnist, in his column today titled "Our Crumbling Foundation", writes:
Blackouts, school buildings in advanced states of disrepair, decrepit highway and railroad bridges — the American infrastructure is growing increasingly old and obsolete. In addition to being an invitation to tragedy, this is a problem that is putting Americans at a disadvantage in the ever more competitive global economy.While seeking to dominate the globe, our brilliant idiots in charge have hollowed out our core in pursuit of personal wealth and power. They tell us they are doing this to keep America strong while weakening our foundation.
Herbert continues:
Felix Rohatyn, the investment banker who helped save New York City from bankruptcy in the 1970s, has been prominent among those trying to sound the infrastructure alarm. Along with former Senator Warren Rudman, he has been criticizing the government’s unwillingness to invest adequately in public transportation systems, water projects, dams, schools, the electrical grid, and so on.
...
“A modern economy needs a modern platform, and that’s the infrastructure,” Mr. Rohatyn said in an interview. “It has been shown that the productivity of an economy is related to the quality of its infrastructure. For example, if you don’t have enough schools to teach your kids, or your kids are taught in schools that have holes in the ceilings, that are dilapidated, they’re not going to be as educated and as competitive in a world economy as they need to be.”
ab·surd /æbˈsɜrd, -ˈzɜrd/ -adjective
1.utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 05 Apr. 2007. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/absurd>.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Bush is the King of Hearts in wonderland
The emperor has no clothes ...
Bush 43 isn't King of the USA, he is the King of Hearts in Wonderland ... absurd ... where down is up, and up is down.
How did our great nation get to this point? It happened when our leaders abandoned skepticism in the pursuit of truth for the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps truth.
It isn't just Bush who is absurd. Look in the mirror, America.
We have plans for success for our children in preschool ... I mean the kind that plot out the steps to high-paying adult careers, for chrissakes!
And you think that's going to turn around anytime soon?
I repeat, we as a society have bought--hook, line, AND sinker (the perfect pun)--the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps the pursuit of truth.
We have abandoned skepticism toward both our understanding of "what is" AND our choices of "what ought to be" ... and in doing so we have become absurd.
Instead of listening to leaders like Congressman Charles Rangel and his concepts of governance taken from the New Testament Book of Matthew, we listen to the likes of Tim Russert who discusses the issues with an eye on ratings.
And worse ... We are the ones who sit glued to the tube watching the news of Anna Nicole Smith's death unfold. We are the ones who spend more time tracking the contestants on American Idol than the policy statements and records of our political candidates.
We are a combination of Rome with the circuses in the Coliseum and Nazi Germany with the fear of others. We are absurd.
Sadly, with the sell-out of labor rights in globalization, we drove off the cliff. Now we have nothing to support a renewal.
And we have no prophets to call us to repentance ... sack cloth and ashes don't wear well in the board room.
Bush 43 isn't King of the USA, he is the King of Hearts in Wonderland ... absurd ... where down is up, and up is down.
How did our great nation get to this point? It happened when our leaders abandoned skepticism in the pursuit of truth for the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps truth.
It isn't just Bush who is absurd. Look in the mirror, America.
We have plans for success for our children in preschool ... I mean the kind that plot out the steps to high-paying adult careers, for chrissakes!
And you think that's going to turn around anytime soon?
I repeat, we as a society have bought--hook, line, AND sinker (the perfect pun)--the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps the pursuit of truth.
We have abandoned skepticism toward both our understanding of "what is" AND our choices of "what ought to be" ... and in doing so we have become absurd.
Instead of listening to leaders like Congressman Charles Rangel and his concepts of governance taken from the New Testament Book of Matthew, we listen to the likes of Tim Russert who discusses the issues with an eye on ratings.
And worse ... We are the ones who sit glued to the tube watching the news of Anna Nicole Smith's death unfold. We are the ones who spend more time tracking the contestants on American Idol than the policy statements and records of our political candidates.
We are a combination of Rome with the circuses in the Coliseum and Nazi Germany with the fear of others. We are absurd.
Sadly, with the sell-out of labor rights in globalization, we drove off the cliff. Now we have nothing to support a renewal.
And we have no prophets to call us to repentance ... sack cloth and ashes don't wear well in the board room.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Some thoughts along the way
- I can think of only two absolutes.
1. There is more than one element making up the cosmos.
2. "What is" is the ground of "what will be" in the awareness of existence.
- Most of what we think we know should be examined with a great deal of skepticism.
- The problem with being too skeptical is not being willing to buy a ticket to Paris if we have never been there. Some faith in "hearsay" is necessary to live.
- How do we separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were? Too much uncertainty results in anxiety, even fear.
- We are taught a narrative of existence from childhood on. To what extent are we able to question it before anxiety or fear are felt?
For example, say that as young children we are taught by the adults in our lives that Disney World, heaven, and hell all exist. Before we go to Disney World it is just the adults telling us it exists. Then we start planning to go there, and because we really believe it exists (have no doubt whatsoever because mommy and daddy told us and others confirm it), we get excited. Then we get there and it is everything and more than what they said it would be like. On the way home from Disney World Mommy and Daddy reaffirm that we are going to heaven if we believe in Jesus and to hell if we don't. Once that emotional marker is set in childhood, it's there for life.
While skepticism will in time alter rational speculations, the emotional element will always be there to be triggered by the skepticism. Because one has to doubt to be skeptical, and doubt alters faith, and our Christian religion teaches that it is faith that saves us ... and in a sense it is right because we act on our beliefs as in whether or not we believe the plane will actually fly.
Think for a moment what it would be like to be taught that dying as a warrior for God results in being awarded direct transport to heaven with a personal cornucopia of goodies provided on arrival ... but I digress.
The rational issue is getting from the aboriginal's spear to the Apollo program ... of getting from planet earth to the outreaches of the universe. In this process skepticism regarding currently accepted speculations is necessary.
Skepticism isn't necessary in itself, but if we are to create what we choose ought to be out of what is, then it is necessary to be skeptical ... both about what is and about what we choose ought to be.
Simply put, it is possible to destroy the world. But because it is possible doesn't mean it should be done. It is possible to burn a person to death, and it has been done. We have decided that is something we should no longer do on purpose as a penalty for heresy or committing a crime.
We now have diseases we can treat with medicine and medical science. There was a time when we relied on our faith in God.
Why are some choices considered moral or ethical choices and others aren't? What is a moral or ethical choice has changed across both time and cultures.
Anyway, some thoughts along the way.
1. There is more than one element making up the cosmos.
2. "What is" is the ground of "what will be" in the awareness of existence.
- Most of what we think we know should be examined with a great deal of skepticism.
- The problem with being too skeptical is not being willing to buy a ticket to Paris if we have never been there. Some faith in "hearsay" is necessary to live.
- How do we separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were? Too much uncertainty results in anxiety, even fear.
- We are taught a narrative of existence from childhood on. To what extent are we able to question it before anxiety or fear are felt?
For example, say that as young children we are taught by the adults in our lives that Disney World, heaven, and hell all exist. Before we go to Disney World it is just the adults telling us it exists. Then we start planning to go there, and because we really believe it exists (have no doubt whatsoever because mommy and daddy told us and others confirm it), we get excited. Then we get there and it is everything and more than what they said it would be like. On the way home from Disney World Mommy and Daddy reaffirm that we are going to heaven if we believe in Jesus and to hell if we don't. Once that emotional marker is set in childhood, it's there for life.
While skepticism will in time alter rational speculations, the emotional element will always be there to be triggered by the skepticism. Because one has to doubt to be skeptical, and doubt alters faith, and our Christian religion teaches that it is faith that saves us ... and in a sense it is right because we act on our beliefs as in whether or not we believe the plane will actually fly.
Think for a moment what it would be like to be taught that dying as a warrior for God results in being awarded direct transport to heaven with a personal cornucopia of goodies provided on arrival ... but I digress.
The rational issue is getting from the aboriginal's spear to the Apollo program ... of getting from planet earth to the outreaches of the universe. In this process skepticism regarding currently accepted speculations is necessary.
Skepticism isn't necessary in itself, but if we are to create what we choose ought to be out of what is, then it is necessary to be skeptical ... both about what is and about what we choose ought to be.
Simply put, it is possible to destroy the world. But because it is possible doesn't mean it should be done. It is possible to burn a person to death, and it has been done. We have decided that is something we should no longer do on purpose as a penalty for heresy or committing a crime.
We now have diseases we can treat with medicine and medical science. There was a time when we relied on our faith in God.
Why are some choices considered moral or ethical choices and others aren't? What is a moral or ethical choice has changed across both time and cultures.
Anyway, some thoughts along the way.
Monday, April 02, 2007
The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ...
If we the people can't have the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth concerning how justice is pursued by the Bush 43 Administration ... then when can we have it?
I mean, if they won't tell us (truthfully, which means under oath for this gang) how and why citizens are hauled into court ... what is Bush 43 aka Shrub willing to tell us truthfully?
This has got nothing to do whether folks are Democrats or Republicans ... or at least it shouldn't. It's got everything whatsoever to do with the concept of justice being blind ... which is not supposed to be the three monkeys: speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil ... no matter what Bush and Gonzales try to foist off on us.
I mean, they have to be kidding, right?
Or are they really that dumb? ... like in, "it's the stupidity, stupid."
I mean, if they won't tell us (truthfully, which means under oath for this gang) how and why citizens are hauled into court ... what is Bush 43 aka Shrub willing to tell us truthfully?
This has got nothing to do whether folks are Democrats or Republicans ... or at least it shouldn't. It's got everything whatsoever to do with the concept of justice being blind ... which is not supposed to be the three monkeys: speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil ... no matter what Bush and Gonzales try to foist off on us.
I mean, they have to be kidding, right?
Or are they really that dumb? ... like in, "it's the stupidity, stupid."
Saturday, March 31, 2007
The new economics - Post 4
Concept: A community's wealth is not given to it by God. It arises out of the synergy of the community, comprising the efforts and mores of the community's people, including their leaders ... whose efforts and mores, by the way, may be in conflict with those of the people.
Concept: If a community's people contributes to the production of wealth by their efforts or by their adherence to the rules of the community, they have a rational right to a rationally proportionate share of that wealth. For example, if we expect people not to steal bread when they are hungry in a community with enough bread to go around, then we had better make sure everyone is fed. It is as simple as that. It is irrational to expect others to quietly go off and die so that I can keep eating.
Concept: Raising the broad foundation for sharing does not impose a limit on the height of the solitary pinnacle. It does, however, provide a firmer footing.
Concept: The United States of America has lost its way in the world and become absurd—economically, politically, ethically— BECAUSE we allow the corporate monopolists' dictum of self-interest to trump truth as an ethical value. We are in that situation of just having driven off the cliff and while not yet falling because the thrust of our forward progress still overcomes the pull of gravity, we cannot stay the course and the only change of course left is to crash. Make no mistake, the corporate monopolists in their greed—selling our birthright of core values that would guide us toward oughtness for a pot of porridge—are the root cause ... while the rest of us pray that we will win the lottery before it all comes crashing down.
Concept: If a community's people contributes to the production of wealth by their efforts or by their adherence to the rules of the community, they have a rational right to a rationally proportionate share of that wealth. For example, if we expect people not to steal bread when they are hungry in a community with enough bread to go around, then we had better make sure everyone is fed. It is as simple as that. It is irrational to expect others to quietly go off and die so that I can keep eating.
Concept: Raising the broad foundation for sharing does not impose a limit on the height of the solitary pinnacle. It does, however, provide a firmer footing.
Concept: The United States of America has lost its way in the world and become absurd—economically, politically, ethically— BECAUSE we allow the corporate monopolists' dictum of self-interest to trump truth as an ethical value. We are in that situation of just having driven off the cliff and while not yet falling because the thrust of our forward progress still overcomes the pull of gravity, we cannot stay the course and the only change of course left is to crash. Make no mistake, the corporate monopolists in their greed—selling our birthright of core values that would guide us toward oughtness for a pot of porridge—are the root cause ... while the rest of us pray that we will win the lottery before it all comes crashing down.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Thoughts on Bill and Hill(ary)
Bill and Hillary are card-carrying members of the political class that is in bondage to corporate monopolists seeking to make the normal pyramid of wealth distribution into an obelisk on the broad base of low-wage labor.
These are people who believe wealth is dispensed from above by God or an Invisible Hand, and not generated out of the synergy of the community producing goods and services for use and exchange in what should be a rational market.
As an aside: In this drive to amass wealth and power, it seems like our friends of the Judaic-Christian persuasion have forgotten the Biblical concept of Jubilee.
You know, the real wealth of a community is like the potential power in a compressed spring. What can be done if it is freed to work? That wealth resides in the health and education of the people. Leaders who do not understand this are Pharoahs building their tombs.
These are people who believe wealth is dispensed from above by God or an Invisible Hand, and not generated out of the synergy of the community producing goods and services for use and exchange in what should be a rational market.
As an aside: In this drive to amass wealth and power, it seems like our friends of the Judaic-Christian persuasion have forgotten the Biblical concept of Jubilee.
You know, the real wealth of a community is like the potential power in a compressed spring. What can be done if it is freed to work? That wealth resides in the health and education of the people. Leaders who do not understand this are Pharoahs building their tombs.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Regarding the fate of the eight ...
It's so darn simple ... If we the people don't have the right to know "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" about how justice is applied by our government, then why do we even bother calling ourselves a "government of the people by the people for the people"?
The Democrats and Republicans are NOT two Texas Junior High School football teams, for chrissake ... on whom we are keeping score ... except maybe in the minds of the emotionally stunted psychopaths in the White House.
Geez-lou-eeze, doesn't anyone know how to govern around here? (With apologies to Casey Stengel.)
The Democrats and Republicans are NOT two Texas Junior High School football teams, for chrissake ... on whom we are keeping score ... except maybe in the minds of the emotionally stunted psychopaths in the White House.
Geez-lou-eeze, doesn't anyone know how to govern around here? (With apologies to Casey Stengel.)
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Unemployment under 5%?
In today's (Thursday, March 15) NY Times, Bob Herbert writes:
The core of Herbert's column is that unemployment for large groups of black men is a third or more.
Our nation is living in such a deep state of denial regarding our economy that we have no realistic chance of turning it around for the common good before we crash.
We have become the Theater of the Absurd ... The Alice In Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass of industrialized nations ... because we call ourselves a Christian nation and we do not heed the demands of Christianity's core values:
Another theme from the book of Daniel in Old Testament that fits us is the story of the hand writting on the wall:
The national unemployment rate came in at 4.5 percent last week and was generally characterized as pretty good. But whatever universe those numbers came from, it was not the universe that black men live in.You can read the column, The Danger Zone if you have TimesSelect ... which I recommend if for only having regular access to Bob Herbert and Paul Krugman.
The core of Herbert's column is that unemployment for large groups of black men is a third or more.
Their employment histories are gruesome. Over the past few years, the percentage of black male high school graduates in their 20s who were jobless (including those who abandoned all efforts to find a job) has ranged from well over a third to roughly 50 percent. Those are the kinds of statistics you get during a depression.
For dropouts, the rates of joblessness are staggering. For black males who left high school without a diploma, the real jobless rate at various times over the past few years has ranged from 59 percent to a breathtaking 72 percent.
Our nation is living in such a deep state of denial regarding our economy that we have no realistic chance of turning it around for the common good before we crash.
We have become the Theater of the Absurd ... The Alice In Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass of industrialized nations ... because we call ourselves a Christian nation and we do not heed the demands of Christianity's core values:
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me.
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.Matthew 25:41-46 New Testament KJV, www.blueletterbible.org
Another theme from the book of Daniel in Old Testament that fits us is the story of the hand writting on the wall:
And this [is] the writing that was written, MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN.
This [is] the interpretation of the thing: MENE; God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it.
TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.
PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.Daniel 5:25-28 Old Testament KJV, www.blueletterbible.org
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
It's the oil, stupid
Antonia Juhasz in her OpEd piece today in the NY Times, Whose Oil Is It, Anyway?, explains how the Bush 43 administration is working to open a substantial amount of Iraq's oil reserves "to international oil companies for a generation or more." Quoting her:
Iraq’s oil reserves — thought to be the second largest in the world — have always been high on the corporate wish list. In 1998, Kenneth Derr, then chief executive of Chevron, told a San Francisco audience, “Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas — reserves I’d love Chevron to have access to.”
and ...
Iraqis may very well choose to use the expertise and experience of international oil companies. They are most likely to do so in a manner that best serves their own needs if they are freed from the tremendous external pressure being exercised by the Bush administration, the oil corporations — and the presence of 140,000 members of the American military.
Iraq’s five trade union federations, representing hundreds of thousands of workers, released a statement opposing the law and rejecting “the handing of control over oil to foreign companies, which would undermine the sovereignty of the state and the dignity of the Iraqi people.” They ask for more time, less pressure and a chance at the democracy they have been promised.
It's the oil, stupid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)