Archive for August, 2010

Our Legacies for Posterity

August 31, 2010

The written word long served as the only real legacy to future generations but many nations or peoples did not write and left a void.

 The rich often left money but most of today’s money is worth less than the entry on the computer chip in Cyber Space.

 What legacy will there be for the vast masses, the majority of those who are now young when the Internet implodes as it surely will and pretty soon too.

 China has indicated the need for control over the Net; the entire World screams back “oh yeah, and what about Freedom of Speech.”  Meantime the irony is that very few people or nations of the World can handle responsible Freedom; perhaps China is right to be concerned.

 I pity the young people of 3010.  They will be poor and they won’t be able to read or write when the Internet “floats up in the skies towards a non-existent Blogosphere.”

 My final Post in the quintet will deal with the situation.

The homogenous will survive

August 31, 2010

And the others, you ask?

 I don’t know why you feel that you have to ask because it is so simple; they will perish.

 The ducks, chickens, homogenous nations and religions will survive.  The Internet will destroy what is left of it and if we are lucky the homogenous will be able to start all over and do a better job next time round.

 The melting pot dream worked while the homogenous also occupied the majority numbers [which is why ducks and chickens, and Darwin’s finches too, will probably survive; the minorities will just go the way of the jungle and fade into oblivion: survival of the fittest and the greatest in numbers will Rule.

 Please wait for the completed Post and let me have your input.

Times of our Lives

August 31, 2010

You are now looking at the third Part of my quintet that will all be published today.

 We live in times of change; the lives of Countries and History go in Cycles; we have just finished one such Cycle and half entered into the next one.

 I want to dwell on that with you but shall conclude the day with some Ikepedia on the times of our lives in any Cycle or Era.

 This is dedicated to the Female Species Homo Sapiens.

 Age 0 Age 10 – the suckling years

 Age 10 to Age 20 – the baby years

 Age 20 to Age 30 – the early childhood years

Age 30 to age 39 – the adolescent years

 Age 40 to Age 50 – the adult years

 Age 50 to Age 60 – the golden years when they are at their most beautiful

 Age 60 to Age 70 – Back to baby days with the grandchildren

 Age 70 plus – Oh God thank you for them because all the men are senile by then.

Tall Tales of Darwin, Chickens and Wild Ducks

August 31, 2010

In this, the second Post in my quintet I want to discuss Darwin’s voyage of 150 years ago, his observations of the finch and a few reptiles.

 I want to compare his theory of Evolution with a recent study mentioned in my previous Post:

 I also want to compare his findings with that of the new discoveries mentioned in:

 And finally there has been intensive research done on Wild Ducks and Chickens which support the abovementioned.

 This will come to you in greater detail in the next few days because I would like to Post all five of the quintet today.

 Please be patient.

Biography of the Species

August 31, 2010

It was different once.  Give or take a few Darwin’s the World as we know it today started only last week; most people don’t realize that the Internet came hardly twenty years ago.  Just think about it; if you are 21 this year you were born before the Internet.

 Will we be able to archive all new discoveries?  Internet archives two thousand years from now may tell the story if we can keep it on the Net and if the Net survives.  I am going to try.

 This Post will remain open forever; new thoughts will be added as we go along and you may comment.  For starters I want to refer to my good Blogger buddy Nolanimrod in his Post at:

 Next please read my Post at:

 And lastly for this time:

 This story is the first of a quintet that I want to publish today.  Look out for all of them and add your views.

Are all of us not just heading the same way …

August 27, 2010

Two articles [Posts] reached me within hours of each other today.

 One is by well-known American columnist Victor Davis Hanson:

 It sobered me but gave me some hope; it depressed and annoyed me at the same time.  I found the contents and the comments too true to ignore; yet I wanted to scream out at the World “to do something” about it.

 The second article [Post] was forwarded to me by an American Friend with connections in the UK:

 My reactions were similar to that on the first one but I was also driven to despair by the “anti-all religion” brigade that is sweeping across England and Western Europe at present.  It’s feeding the Liberanarchist Monster with its “all religion is superstition” slogan as if a World without Religion can save us.

 John Steinbeck turned Rocinante east after visiting his “Monterey of old” in the waning last weeks of his trip across America in 1960 and headed out for the desert he had to cross before hitting the home leg to Long Island on the other side of the States.

 An encounter with a desert coyote produced some of the most beautiful prose, if in fact not the best ever, on life and the desert.  Do read his Travels with Charlie.  He saw strong signs of enduring life in that place that seems so devoid of life and posed the question whether it may be that life in the desert will survive, and populate the World again, when we have destroyed the present one. 

 I am not that desperate yet to believe that will be our fate but I am not greatly encouraged by the current lack of action to stem the tide of wanton destruction of life and all Faith and/or Religion as we knew it when we were young.

All Freedoms are not Equal in Time

August 26, 2010

If you think that you have seen suppression of Freedom of Speech, how about this one?  It’s a classic; seeing it done by the Supreme Defenders of Freedom makes it a double Classic.

 Time Swampland has been running a series of Posts on the mosque.  Joe Klein lead the charge but most of the other Great Time Journolists weighed in with gusto.

It started with this ill-fated Post by Amy Sullivan:

 Many of their own regular readers shot back and when Joe towards the end dragged Pakistan into the mess the readers tore into him.  They mutilated the poor fellow.

 I had added my bit; then I found a link from a visitor in my Blog in my WordPress Stats.  When I clicked on it this came up:

 Time and Joe obvious know that they have to change course on Obama.  They “made a President” in Obama because there was a lot of money in him in 2008; now it seems as if they cannot decide whether they should ditch him right away or take a risk that the people may ditch Him, and them, two years down the line.

 Joe’s new WordPress Post is therefore, not as much that “Obama has chosen another way” but seems more like one last effort to salvage a failing Presidency.  In the meantime however, the mid-term primaries came up and Joe got very little support from the selected faithful in his new window-dressing effort.  He sang the praises for their Chosen One [and Joe sings well] but not many turned up to make it a good chorus, though a few sang very sweetly.

 During the same week Victor Davis Hanson weighed in heavily with an authoritative work in:

 America has taken a lot of flak from the World but the World always, though grudgingly at times, respected the American Presidency.  Recently however, for the first time in history a Presidency has come to exist as the laughing stock of the World.

 This is the Time when Joe abandoned his support for Freedom of Speech.  I submitted a short sober comment on Joe’s last stand about the “new chosen other way” in which I said, inter alia, in reference to the previous Posts mentioned above:

 “As if it wasn’t enough it didn’t stop there and by the Time you weighed in with “Evaluating Obama” a lot more than half of your own readers were mad.  You can’t just keep on heating abuse on the former President.  Whether you like it or not many voters still respect the man; they are angry, Joe, and their own columnists like Victor Hanson are not sleeping on the job.


 The comment was accepted “awaiting moderation” and then disappeared.

 When is Time going to ditch their Chosen One?  It seems more and more like just a matter of time.  In the end it always comes down to Money in politics; when the money goes out of the door new allegiances are formed.  Time is up, Folks.  Those results that are already out for the mid-term primaries tell a story that they can’t ignore if they want “their share” of the Money.

Sloppy Joe, the Journolist

August 23, 2010

This Post needs no other exploration; it’s all in:

 And I am not only referring to the first comment.

Are all Americans …

August 23, 2010

You can try this any way you choose.

 One way would be to put any adjective or adverb behind the word Americans; try good for one, or try the word bad, or try pretty.

 Next step, you leave the last adjective that you have in but change the word Americans to British, or Italians, Greeks, Muslim, Christian, Catholic, or anything that you wish to.

 The answer to any combination will be an emphatic capital letters NO.

 Blogs have been agog with references to all, half or all sorts of percentages of ALL this and that and everything but, sadly, produced nothing worth reading in the first place and zilch worth remembering of the floods of accusations, analyses, solutions and plain common petty personal clashes.

 There is a reason for this.

 The word ALL or “any percentage of ALL this or that” is the most mistreated word or description in the use of language.

 There is only one situation where the use of ALL would make any sense and only two variations thereof:

 All good people are inherently good, as will be that all bad people are inherently bad.  Both would be equally true.

 Otherwise, please leave me out of wild statements.  I am an individual; not a group.  Every individual is unique; no two [not even identical twins] are ever the same.

 Oh Yeah, that reminds me that there may be one more proper use for All.  It would be true if you were to say that All People [of every religion, race or language, or any color from light blue to dark pink] do have one thing in common, and that is that everyone is unique.

 PS: This Post is dedicated to some old Blogging Friends; the inspiration for it was however, provided by a person whom I met for the first time in My Blog Stats on My Dashboard on my Blog only an hour ago.  I will reveal his name later but in the meantime hope that he will recognize the theme.  These are my words but he was the catalyst to Post it.

 The debate is now open for discussion and questions.

Are almost half of American Journolists Asses

August 21, 2010

To follow up on my Post:

 Courtesy of my email Friend Nimrod.  He has his own Blog; it’s very special.  There is no other Blogger like Nimrod and I shall introduce him to you soon.

 He has his own unique way with words; as in the headline of the email that I received from him:

 Too Cool by Half?

 The rest is all verbatim; you will have to wait until the end for my answer to my own headline.  I now hand you over to Nimrod.


 Richard Nixon was not a crook, Michael Dukakis was not unpatriotic, and Barack Obama is not a Muslim. Unlike Nixon and Dukakis, Obama didn’t actually issue an explicit defensive denial; instead, as we noted yesterday, the president said through a spokesman that he “is obviously a Christian. He prays every day.”

 But reports that CNN recast it as a Nixonian denial: “W.H.: PRES. OBAMA ISN’T MUSLIM,” read a chyron (caption at the bottom of the screen) yesterday on “The Situation Room,” as Wolf Blitzer led his program with a discussion of a recent poll in which 18% of participants thought Obama was Muslim.

 One of Blitzer’s guests, James Carville, offered this explanation for the finding:

 “I don’t [know] other than the fact people are just willing to believe anything or there are a lot of stupid people out there,” Carville said. “I really don’t have an explanation, just like I don’t have an explanation for the fact that you see some of these polls that a quarter of the people believe he was born outside the country. I’m just as flummoxed as the next person.”

 Newsbusters’ Jeff Poor makes an excellent point:

 Every time the question about President Barack Obama’s faith is brought up, the wizards of smart in the mainstream media get up in arms about “right-wingers” or “tea partiers” perpetuating those allegations. But is it possible that by devoting so much attention to these issues of Obama’s faith and his citizenship, the media are creating the very feeding frenzy they’re appalled by?

 This sounds exactly right to us. The agenda behind these polls, and the liberal media’s reporting on them, is to portray critics of President Obama as kooks and idiots. (and, if you’re John Avlon, to peddle books, as we noted in March).

 This strategy is backfiring, and in two ways. First, as Poor suggests, by mainstreaming these supposedly fringe notions. If the idea that Obama is Muslim merits the attention of the august Pew Research Center for the People and the Press and the most respected name in news, who’s to say it’s crazy, or even wrong?

 Second, it puts the ugly attitudes of the liberal elite on display, à la Lonesome Rhodes’s open-mic incident in “A Face in the Crowd.” Now we know that James Carville thinks “there are a lot of stupid people out there.” At least those who work in the Obama White House are, for the most part, disciplined enough not to make such insulting statements–as Carville himself was when he worked for President Clinton. Yet when people hear such contemptuous statements from the president’s supporters in the media (as well as from some in politics, most notably Speaker Nancy Pelosi), they can draw their own conclusions about what Obama and his inner circle think of them.

 Thus, at a time when the vast majority of voters oppose the president’s policies for any number of legitimate reasons, the media’s self-superior dwelling on “stupid” or “kooky” Obama critics tends to marginalize Obama, not his opponents. Obama’s presidency is being consumed in a bonfire of liberal vanities.

 All the News That’s Fit to Print

 The great Greg Sargent notes a telling finding in the Pew poll: “A solid majority” of respondents who think President Obama is Muslim “say they ‘learned’ it from the media.”

 Sarge scratches his head:

 I’m not sure what to make of that. Maybe some voices on the right have succeeded in creating an alternate reality that really is impenetrable. Maybe traditional news orgs haven’t been forceful enough in knocking the lies down. Or, alternatively, maybe there’s a segment of folks who are so distrustful of the “MSM” that they believe the opposite of what it tells them.

 Maybe they read this article, published during the 2008 campaign:

 As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant.

 Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.

 His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).

 What right-wing rag published this? The New York Times, of course.

 I posed the question in my headline.  My answer is a resounding NO because All American Journolists are ASSES.  They of course, in looking down on the masses from their lofty heights, think that half of the people will believe them because Journolists believe that half of the people are asses.