I am astounded at all of the emoting going on in the press and in social media over our alleged president's visit to Hiroshima. There seems to be a lot of moralizing over whether dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the right decision. Are you fucking kidding me? Seriously?
In 1945, Lt. Jack N. Hodge - the N stands for "none" because that is what he wrote on the blank for on his enlistment form where it said "Middle Name" when he signed up - was flying a TBF off the Ticonderoga near Okinawa waiting for the invasion of Japan to begin. Dad was a torpedo plane pilot because he signed up shortly after the Battle of Midway, where the Navy had essentially all of their torpedo plane pilots shot down (meaning "dead")...Ensign Hodge, you just volunteered for a torpedo plane duty. Military planners were anticipating 1,000,000 American casualties from an invasion of the Japanese home islands. That is one million, with an 'M". I am here to write this, in all probability, because the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Japan and ended the war. Needless to say, I'm a fan of the decision.
If you're not, I won't try to convince you otherwise. All I would ask is that you step back from the mindless echo chamber of social media and read some history. The bibliography of WWII history is huge, but allow me to throw out a few titles:
With the Old Breed - E.B. Sledge
Good Bye Darkness - William Manchester
Helmet For My Pillow - Robert Leckie
Strong Men Armed - Robert Leckie
Red Blood, Black Sand - Chuck Tatum
These books are significant in that they were written by Marines who were in combat in the Pacific. E.B. Sledge's and Chuck Tatum's books were the partially the basis for The Pacific mini-series.
Here are some more:
Shattered Sword - Jonathan Parshall...A history of the Battle of Midway that is based on both Japanese and American sources.
Neptune's Inferno - James Hornfischer...a description of the naval battles during the Guadalcanal campaign and there is no better description of the horrors of fighting between big gun ships than this.
Two Ocean War - Adm. Samuel Eliot Morrison...a condensation of Morrison's 15 volume naval history of WWII.
Last Stand of the Tin Can Soldiers - James Hornfischer...A history of the Battle of Samar.
The Conquering Tide - Ian Toll...A fairly even handed view of the Pacific War. I am right in the middle of reading this now.
I am just picking books at random off my bookshelf and out of my Kindle (others should feel free to add), but my point here is the War in the Pacific is extensively documented from a lot of different points of view. I am convinced that when our fathers and grandfathers went to war against the Japanese they became giants walking the Earth, but do some reading make up your own mind.
Saturday, May 28, 2016
Monday, May 2, 2016
Who's a Good Boy?
"Perhaps you see the mark of the collar to which my chain is fastened"
Volunteering to be serfs
Step Right Up Pick A Winner
Choose your feudal lord now
Don't have to worry about anything now
Sheep voting for their shepherds
Voting for their stern daddy
Voting for their master
Wolves begging to be lap dogs
Voting for their pretty collar
Equally beautiful collars
Voting for their identical treats
Voting for their identical beds
Everyone is the same now
No freedom or identity now
Our leash will keep us safe
Our pen will keep us safe
Amen
Saturday, April 30, 2016
We're from the government and we're here to help...
A long, but a true story:
It should be no surprise to anyone that the great majority of the world's battery manufacturing capacity resides in the Far East; upwards of 90% of the world's batteries come out of China, Japan, and South Korea. Elon Musk's adventure in northern Nevada may change those numbers some, but time will tell.
In 2009, the Department of Energy was fired with the fevered visions of new Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu. Dr. Chu and Mr. Obama had dreams of a future without fossil fuels and an economy driven by windmills, solar panels, and electric cars...lots and lots of electric cars. I sat in meetings where DOE bureaucrats predicted, with the dead-serious, stone-faced certainty that only people living in the fantasy world inside the Washington Beltway are capable of, that there would be 15 million electric cars on the road by 2015. But someone had to make the batteries for all those cars.
Enter Congress, who at the behest of Mr. Obama, passed the ARRA bill (more commonly known as the "stimulus package"), which, among other things, funneled huge amounts of money into the DOE. The DOE decided they would use some of that money - $2.4 billion dollars worth...that's "billion" with a "b" - to stimulate the moribund and virtually non-existent US battery and electric vehicle industries and the Advanced Battery Manufacturing Initiative came into being. Under the ABMI, the DOE would pay companies to build battery factories in the United States. Note that these were not the loan guarantees since made famous by other DOE boondoggles, like Solyndra, these were grants...cash, given to a company without expectation of repayment. The only constraint on the grant was that the awardee had to match the amount of the grant with private funds. In effect, the DOE would permit awardees to build a manufacturing plant for half-price.
The ABMI announcement, as might be expected, set off a frenzy of activity. Joint ventures were formed, start-up companies were started, large corporations began including batteries or battery materials in their strategic development plans, and every battery company ( and a lot of wannabees) in America started writing a proposal.
The selection of awardees was Kabuki theater. The Federal government cannot dole out $2 billion without the process becoming political. If you did not propose building your factory in Michigan, you essentially took yourself out of the competition. A joint venture between Johnson Controls and Saft (a French company) received $229 million to build a plant in Michigan. LG Chem, a Korean company, received $151 million to build a plant in Michigan. A123 Systems was the big winner with a $249 million award to build a plant in Livonia, MI. There were other recipients of all this government largesse, of course, and if you're interested, you can find out more here.
The announcement left most people in the industry scratching their heads. Money intended to stimulate the US battery industry had been awarded to foreign companies. However, the award to A123 Systems surprised no one; they had been a DOE pet project for a number of years. I met with a DOE program manager prior to the ABMI announcement who smiled at me and said, "You know, it was my SBIR grant that got A123 started." Knowing the founders of A123, I knew this was not entirely true, but it did make clear to me that my company, a competitor, had essentially zero chance of getting funding from a program manager who was obviously bolstering his career by having given "A123 its start".
Upon announcing their awards, the DOE insisted that they were "not picking winners and losers", but in point of fact, that was exactly what they were doing. The ABMI awards essentially killed any private investment in companies that had not received a grant. After all, if your technology and talent couldn't pass muster with the DOE, why would anyone want to invest in you...and even if you knew what you were doing, how were you going to compete with companies that just received 9-figure grants from the U.S. government.
With the exception of the few anointed companies, the years that followed the AMBI grants were not kind to the U.S. battery industry. Bankruptcies among both established and start-up companies were the rule, not the exception. The founders of my own company were, on several occasions, reduced to loaning the company money to make payroll. No one was feeling particularly "stimulated" by the DOE's program.
Fast forward to 2016: The Johnson Controls/Saft JV dissolved with extreme prejudice before they even broke ground on their factory. LG Chem built their factory, but it's use has been limited to importing cells from South Korea and assembling battery packs. A123 seemed to be the sole success story; building a plant in Livonia and having a very successful IPO that raised $380 million. But there was always a no-visible-means-of-support aspect to the company's apparent success and, after building $50 million worth of bad product in their new plant - how do you even do that? - that resulted in a number of fires, primarily in the Fisker Karma electric vehicles they were making batteries for, A123 went into a death spiral. The company went spectacularly bankrupt and the assets were bought by the Chinese.
The country is still without a commercial battery manufacturing plant and, while Tesla's facility in northern Nevada may change that shortly, it is certainly no thanks to the technocrats at the Department of Energy.
It should be no surprise to anyone that the great majority of the world's battery manufacturing capacity resides in the Far East; upwards of 90% of the world's batteries come out of China, Japan, and South Korea. Elon Musk's adventure in northern Nevada may change those numbers some, but time will tell.
In 2009, the Department of Energy was fired with the fevered visions of new Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu. Dr. Chu and Mr. Obama had dreams of a future without fossil fuels and an economy driven by windmills, solar panels, and electric cars...lots and lots of electric cars. I sat in meetings where DOE bureaucrats predicted, with the dead-serious, stone-faced certainty that only people living in the fantasy world inside the Washington Beltway are capable of, that there would be 15 million electric cars on the road by 2015. But someone had to make the batteries for all those cars.
Enter Congress, who at the behest of Mr. Obama, passed the ARRA bill (more commonly known as the "stimulus package"), which, among other things, funneled huge amounts of money into the DOE. The DOE decided they would use some of that money - $2.4 billion dollars worth...that's "billion" with a "b" - to stimulate the moribund and virtually non-existent US battery and electric vehicle industries and the Advanced Battery Manufacturing Initiative came into being. Under the ABMI, the DOE would pay companies to build battery factories in the United States. Note that these were not the loan guarantees since made famous by other DOE boondoggles, like Solyndra, these were grants...cash, given to a company without expectation of repayment. The only constraint on the grant was that the awardee had to match the amount of the grant with private funds. In effect, the DOE would permit awardees to build a manufacturing plant for half-price.
The ABMI announcement, as might be expected, set off a frenzy of activity. Joint ventures were formed, start-up companies were started, large corporations began including batteries or battery materials in their strategic development plans, and every battery company ( and a lot of wannabees) in America started writing a proposal.
The selection of awardees was Kabuki theater. The Federal government cannot dole out $2 billion without the process becoming political. If you did not propose building your factory in Michigan, you essentially took yourself out of the competition. A joint venture between Johnson Controls and Saft (a French company) received $229 million to build a plant in Michigan. LG Chem, a Korean company, received $151 million to build a plant in Michigan. A123 Systems was the big winner with a $249 million award to build a plant in Livonia, MI. There were other recipients of all this government largesse, of course, and if you're interested, you can find out more here.
The announcement left most people in the industry scratching their heads. Money intended to stimulate the US battery industry had been awarded to foreign companies. However, the award to A123 Systems surprised no one; they had been a DOE pet project for a number of years. I met with a DOE program manager prior to the ABMI announcement who smiled at me and said, "You know, it was my SBIR grant that got A123 started." Knowing the founders of A123, I knew this was not entirely true, but it did make clear to me that my company, a competitor, had essentially zero chance of getting funding from a program manager who was obviously bolstering his career by having given "A123 its start".
Upon announcing their awards, the DOE insisted that they were "not picking winners and losers", but in point of fact, that was exactly what they were doing. The ABMI awards essentially killed any private investment in companies that had not received a grant. After all, if your technology and talent couldn't pass muster with the DOE, why would anyone want to invest in you...and even if you knew what you were doing, how were you going to compete with companies that just received 9-figure grants from the U.S. government.
With the exception of the few anointed companies, the years that followed the AMBI grants were not kind to the U.S. battery industry. Bankruptcies among both established and start-up companies were the rule, not the exception. The founders of my own company were, on several occasions, reduced to loaning the company money to make payroll. No one was feeling particularly "stimulated" by the DOE's program.
Fast forward to 2016: The Johnson Controls/Saft JV dissolved with extreme prejudice before they even broke ground on their factory. LG Chem built their factory, but it's use has been limited to importing cells from South Korea and assembling battery packs. A123 seemed to be the sole success story; building a plant in Livonia and having a very successful IPO that raised $380 million. But there was always a no-visible-means-of-support aspect to the company's apparent success and, after building $50 million worth of bad product in their new plant - how do you even do that? - that resulted in a number of fires, primarily in the Fisker Karma electric vehicles they were making batteries for, A123 went into a death spiral. The company went spectacularly bankrupt and the assets were bought by the Chinese.
The country is still without a commercial battery manufacturing plant and, while Tesla's facility in northern Nevada may change that shortly, it is certainly no thanks to the technocrats at the Department of Energy.
Thursday, April 28, 2016
Stupid Grapes
For the longest time, superiority complexes and perpetual smugness were stereotypically Democrat identifiers. Sadly, this trend has blended over, in the spirit of cooperation as it were, across the aisle. While I agree the average voter is, naturally, of average intelligence, I am troubled by the sudden rash of pundits and conservative writers calling the base "losers" and "stupid". Intimating that the GOP bears no responsibility for the mess the country is in. We as individuals are in a bed of our own making, and it's just OUR stupidity that got us in this mess.
Well if we got here on our own, and you think we can get out of it on our own...wtf do we need you?
oh...
Do not misunderstand me. I DO believe in personal responsibility. It's the reason why I tend to vote for the most conservative candidate available. Unfortunately, that is getting ever harder to do. It is difficult to exercise personal responsibility while the GOP is constantly bowing to the party that insists on legislating it away. Tough love, coming from a party of compromising pussies, is laughable.
(Though I do find it ironic that articles chastising poor people for their lot in life is hidden behind a paywall)
You are selling us a candidate or a party based on how bad the other candidate and party have destroyed the country and the economy, it isn't a smart move to blame the constituents for the position they find themselves in, in life. Did the Democrats ruin our lives, or did we do it. If we did it in our stupidity, how did we become so ignorant?
The masses are uneducated. Ignorant of the process.Who let the liberals educate the masses? Who have you let control the federal department of education, with only minor "conservative" additions like No Child Left Behind. Why was the Common Core Candidate JEB! himself, considered remotely electable. Dietrich Bonhoeffer stated,"Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." So, you've been silent on education, you haven't acted to stop the degradation. You should have. You were elected to. You have not acted, the ignorant masses you deride are on you.
"Vote for us! We will defund the evil PP that donates to the evil Democrats that votes to fund them. Just give us a majority" gives way to, " Yeah.. so.. we have a majority, but we can't really defund PP. That will lose us crucial seats later. You really need us in office to keep doing the work you sent us here to do, even though we don't, and you are too stupid to see it." You foisted on us the Gruber infested candidacy of Mitt Romney, but yeah we are dumb enough to think you are going to fight to repeal ACA.
These ignorant rubes are smart enough to see you've been playing them like the Democrats play women and minorities. So either they are genius enough to see through your superior plans, or your ruse was just basic.
Like any jilted lover, the fox despised the grapes he couldn't win, and disparaged them. Instead of finding a way to reach them, he left them hanging.
Friday, April 15, 2016
S I S Y P H U S
We are getting our new kitchen cabinets there, so I am here to advise you, should you ever consider such an endeavor, how to navigate the process in 20 long steps:
- Discover the shortcuts from the entrance to the kitchen design section and back out again. You will be visiting multiple times, and unless you need 20,000 steps a day, this will save you.
- On your first trip in consideration of a new kitchen, stop at at least 3 configurations and open every single drawer and door. Pay some attention.
- Pick up all of the Buying Guides: Kitchens (for the 50,000 foot overview). For the details, pick up the following: Cabinets, Fronts, Organizers, Knobs & Handles; Appliances (made by Whirlpool with a 5-year warranty); and Countertops, Sinks & Faucets. You will pore over these for months before you scratch the surface of the (damned near endless) possibilities.
- Also pick up the Lighting Guide and the Kitchen Installation Guide. These will discourage you, at first glance, after you've seen all the other possibilities from the previous Buying Guides. Hang in there.
- If you are like me, it will take you a month to discover what the Buying Guides are trying to show you about how awesome your kitchen can be. You will need to read and re-read, and cross-reference each one, every day for at least 4 hours. Your brain will begin to comprehend.
- With your limited knowledge of the endless possibilities of your new kitchen, you will need to venture to IKEA. Bring your pots, pans, baking sheets (or at least measurements of them), to make sure they will fit into your new appliances, sink and cabinets. Make sure your refrigerator shelves can actually be washed in your sink without machinations (and water on the countertops and floor). [Here's where the fun starts]
- Measure your kitchen -- at least 5 times. If you've gutted it, make sure you're accounting for the thickness of your drywall, flooring, ceiling height, etc.
- Okay. If you've come this far, perhaps you're willing to go a bit further. Create an online profile (free). If you think someone is going to use your info for nefarious purposes, you don't belong here on Social Media anyway.
- March into IKEA (and all its shortcuts) with purpose. Go to the Kitchen section and ask for a computer so you can build your dream kitchen online -- in the cloud (you can always change it later).
- Spend 3+ hours getting a final framework of the ideas you've been building. Only to discover that you suck as a Kitchen Designer, but with the knowledge that you have done your due diligence. Be encouraged by the salesperson who assures you that you're doing it right, because most people walk in and think they can design a kitchen in an hour because, "It's IKEA!"
- Know that you are close to completing your order because you've done your due diligence.
- Go home. Think about it. Sleep on it. Dream about it. Wake up and realize you still don't get the whole "drawer within a hidden drawer" thing (what actually fits underneath that hidden drawer? And if it's only takeout menus, why the hell am I building a kitchen??)
- Go back home. Discover that in your 5 measurements, you didn't see the sink drain pipe that sits right where the dishwasher is supposed to be. Panic, but only briefly. Call a plumber and see if he can fix the problem in the next 4 days, because you've got a crew installing drywall on Day 5. Calm down when he says, "Yes."
- Go back to IKEA. Start your design from scratch -- with your new measurements and your new understanding of cabinet drawer configurations (That whisk, and that ladle. They're really going to fit in there?) IKEA has lots of these things around in their vignettes. Go grab as many utensils as you can find, shove them in that "inner drawer" and see if they "really" fit -- and how).
- Go back home. Revisit your plan. Realize that, while you haven't messed up anything as far as the HVAC guys and the plumber are concerned, your "filler" pieces aren't quite in the right place. Make notes on your plan.
- Okay, now is the time to dig deep for the Spendthrift in you. (If you can't dig that deep, I can't help you). If you spend at least $X on your kitchen you will receive a 15% discount of the pre-tax amount, in the form of a gift card you can only spend at IKEA.
- Now, you have to do math. $X x 1.Y (where Y is your local sales tax as a percentage), will tell you the ultimate price you have to pay. And $X x .15 is the amount you can still spend at IKEA. The key is to reduce X by enough so you pay the least amount possible, yet still have enough of the 15% to get everything you need. This is difficult when a lot of good, quality, practical things are $4.99/6-pk.
- Okay, so now you've figured out that you've spent enough money to afford the lights you wanted to get elsewhere (because they cost less), but now you've spent so much, that you may as well get them here, because you really don't need 500 100-pk. tealight candles.
- Next to last steps. Start shopping in your mind (via the catalogue) for all the things you would not have otherwise bought at IKEA, but now you realize you can't live without (because, well, you can't spend this money anywhere else). You may even have to traverse the entire store (no shortcuts), take photos and create an Excel spreadsheet. Once your drywall is up, you will feel compelled to measure one last time (now that you can better visualize things and are able to write measurements on the actual surface).
- Go to IKEA on the last day of the sale, where (undoubtedly) there will be 500 other people who followed your exact plan. You will stand in line for hours waiting to pay for your cabinets, then you will have to traverse the store for all the stuff you're going to buy with your gift card, and then you will have to stand in line for another hour to check out (because they have 50 registers, but only ever have 5 open). And don't forget that they don't have bags. You'll have to buy one or bring your own -- or have 16 arms to carry everything.
BONUS: Since you are now an IKEA Family Member, you get a free ice cream cone. But you'll have to go back upstairs to the Cafe for that -- and then shortcut your way back out.
You're welcome.
Thursday, March 31, 2016
Bending a Knee to Baal
Flapping Lips have their say
Brazen idol olden golden
Raised fists are emboldened
Demagoguery war of foggery
Inky stink of word boggery
Unfettered streams of worshipful praise
He will Save us from our malaise
Disparate desperation
calling us to oblation
Bonded bands of warring priests
Calling us to join their feasts
No one can
save you
No one should
save you
New messiahs for social pariahs
just another line of --- liars
Personality over powers
empty suits empty towers
Over burdened feet of clay
can not help but to give way
Spokes model idol fallen idle
Empty revival vain word recital
Led by malevolent benevolence
To our Magnificent irrelevance
We shall avoid the next disaster
By simply electing a better master
He who would
save you
instead will
enslave you
(Top pic - By illustrators of the 1890 Holman Bible - http://thebiblerevival.com/clipart/1890holmanbible/bw/thegoldencalf.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=8874800)
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Already Great, Thanks
I am America
are you?
I am already great.
aren't you?
If not,
why not.
What will it take
to make you great?
Will it take
a man
with an
orange tan
to make you great
If so,
why so?
What is so great
about America
Me and
even you
I have already
been made
haven't you?
Sunday, March 13, 2016
Abandon Hope and Change Course
I am a firm believer of mutual self construction.
By which I mean individuals
united in their seclusion.
Conjoined disjointed orphans
Erecting a Solace of Fortitude,
Asylums of Family Disunity
A harmonious cacophony of orchestrated solos
Instrumental temperamental
monumental chorus vocalizing
localizing
Individual vision
Alas
Feral sheep shepherded astray
by a Piper's dulcet atonement
Promissory sour notes called
due
Bald faced ideological ribaldry
Preselected elected offal, officious
Inhumane scentipede
Mentally ill dressed succession
of public servants self servicing
Disarmed armada of the disillusioned
flotilla of fools on the Hill
Come sale away with me, indeed
Flotsam jet setters presiding
Deciding
Die-er consequences
Pirated copies of declarations
of interdependence.
Anchors a weigh
My country-
tis for me
Sweet land where things are free
Of me Im singing
Land where our fathers sighed
Land where their dreams have died
State of Ship of State, Sinking
Thursday, February 25, 2016
The Shaming of the Fools
Trump
Oh GOP Oh GOP
Wherefore art thou GOP?
Deny your standards and ignore thy base
Or, if thou wilt not be but sworn my liege
And I'll no longer be a Democrat
Republicans-
Shall I hear more, or shall I speak at this?
Trump-
Tis but thy name that is my enemy
Thou art thyself, though not conservative
What is a conservative? it is not thought or deed
Nor ideals nor beliefs nor any ideology
belonging to a man, O be some other name!
What's in a name, that which we call Republican
By any other name would still elect a personality
So GOP would, were he not GOP call'd
Discard that dear platform which he owes
Without that title. GOP doff thy name,
And for that Name which is no part of thee
take all of myself
I will take the party by my words
Call me but yours, and we will be New Democrats
Henceforth We will never be GOP
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Of Genie's, bottles, and Pandora's Box
"SO WHAT!!" You exclaim. Who cares? Screw Apple, they should do the patriotic thing and help the Government catch those terrorist dogs before more Americans are hurt or killed!
Whoa there skippy! Calm down. Put down that pitchfork and put out that torch before you hurt yourself. Let me explain why I and a lot of others who understand this situation are behind Apple defying this court order...100%.
1.) The federal government is asking for something that does not exist. While they are saying that it is only this one time, if Apple were to comply and spend the millions of dollars developing this backdoor, the precedent would be set and more and more cases would be based on this. There are already discussions about how strong of encryption/security civilians should be allowed to have. That should scare any sane person out of their minds. Additionally, there are reports of as many as 13 other iPhones that the FBI want included on this court order. So much for just this one time, just this one phone. As I said above...the Genie will be out of the bottle and won't go back
2.) Apple has built a reputation of having extremely secure products, building this custom version of iOS would destroy that reputation while putting the security of every single iPhone owner at risk of having their information stolen because the details of this iOS version will be leaked, people can be bought. Having this tool available is dangerous, plain and simple. When its details were to get out, regardless of how, someone will find a way to reverse engineer it so that it can be remotely installed on the iPhone of unsuspecting people. Information will be stolen. Hackers are crafty suckers. If something exists, they will find a way to get it, or break into it.
3.) This brings up my 3rd point, the reason the government cannot break this phone is because of the hackers they employ. They don't employ people who have the creative genius necessary to do this sort of work. The Mozarts, and Bachs of our day. The people who can see systems in ways that you can I could never learn. The government won't hire these people. Why? Because they won't hire people with 2' tall mohawks, tattoos, heavy gauge piercings, who demand a salary of over $500,000/yr. There are people who do hire them. One of them is named Tim McAfee. He has said that he his team can break that phone within 3 weeks time and they will do it for free. Tim hires the right people to do that because he has built an international company around security. A company that is trusted, and has earned that trust through years of keeping peoples data safe. Its what they do.
4.) Despite what is being reported, Apple has been cooperating with the FBI. They have spent a large amount of money advising the FBI and offering specifications and other details in their attempt to help the FBI to break this phone. They said that if there was a way to get the phone to back itself up to the iCloud that they would decrypt and turn the data over to the FBI from that backup. The problem with that idea comes from a low level county employee who changed the iTunes password that was associated with that phone. That single act prevents that phone from performing a backup to the iCloud. Where Apple is having an issue is the order to create that which doesn't exist. A specialized, and compromised, version of iOS.
Yes, Apple has broken into iPhones in the past. Those iPhones were running older, not nearly as secure versions of iOS. Those phones lack the hardware, and software protective measures that the newer iPhones, such as my iPhone 6s has. These are complex systems that where software and hardware work together to protect the data that is stored on the data.
Look at it this way. Would you want the manufacturers of the government computer systems to leave back doors that they could use to get into the systems, you know just in case.
The long and the short of it is, Apple did a damn fine job making sure that phone is not able to be broken. They did a damn fine job making a product that is secure, and now they are being told that they have to compromise that security by creating a compromised version of iOS. That compromised version will find its way into the wild into the hands of nefarious people. That compromised version will be abused by our government.
Yes I am all for catching terrorists. But I will not sacrifice liberty (mine or another's) in order to do it. Those that would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.
When They Came For Us, We Had Already Done The Job For Them
Perhaps it's just me, but the answer to online censorship is not tucking tail and running, but rather the "Hail Hydra" approach. Every account shut down should be met with seven new accounts opening up. What exactly is the benefit in saying "Oh, they might stop me from speaking, so I am going to preemptively shut up"?
I have been quite flabbergasted at the "Imma gonna quit" crowd. THIS, boys and girls, is why conservatives are losing. We can't keep our voices if we leave at the first sign of any push back.
I have a serious problem with a media platform, in an election year, silencing opposition voices. I have an even bigger problem with conservative voices volunteering to pack up and leave.
We were told that conservative voices weren't wanted in schools.
So we left.
We were told conservative voices weren't wanted in Hollywood.
So we left.
We were told conservative voices weren't wanted in media.
So we left
We were told that conservative voices were not wanted in government
So we left
We were told that conservative voices were not wanted on social media.
So
we
left
In life, the old adage still holds true, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease". One has to be the squeakiest wheel in this game. And conservatives are still playing "Thank you Sir, can I have another", with shuffling feet and downturned eyes. Yet, we we have the audacity to complain when our congressmen represent us to a T.
Look, for example, at the fight for a defining core conservative principle, The Right to Life, versus the core defining liberal principle, Abortion on Demand. In the public square we have screeching liberal women vehemently, unabashedly, marching with vagina hand puppets, even full body costumes, to protest state governments defunding Planned Parenthood being praised as good, wholesome, unobjectionable, righteous even.
On the other side, women marching solemnly, prayerfully, with actual pictures of aborted babies, being vilified as gross, disgusting, objectionable, inflammatory, accusatory, evil, mean. Do we indeed have the courage of our convictions? Are we still watching, supporting the network that brought us this? Yes, we are. We politely eat what is put on our plate, and wonder why we keep getting fed garbage.
College campuses are another ground that we have lost, without a proverbial shot fired. Due process for men accused of heinous crimes are being trampled upon with impunity. We have even had presidential candidates praise this nonsense. Any voice that criticizes is met with accusations of being a rape apologist or worse, an actual rapist. Those words, just like the readily bandied "racist" are effective at melting conservatives like water on a witch. "What a world" indeed. Perhaps there is some merit after all, in the SJW claim that words are violence, when the threat of being called names keeps people from speaking their minds.
If our principles are not important enough for us to stand for them, how to we expect to win hearts and minds? Especially when we have hogtied and gagged ourselves voluntarily. We can not afford to hover outside the window, moping like sad vampires of old, waiting to be invited in. We must boldly go in, as it were, and be ready to verbally stand and defend our hills. Waving a white flag and walking off of them surely is a strategy for a loss.
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
On Sacrifice
According to Merriam-Webster, the simple definition of "sacrifice" is "the act of giving up something that you want to keep especially in order to get or do something else or to help someone." Many sacrifices have been made by
all of our ancestors for the benefit of their future generations — us. These
sacrifices were for life, liberty and freedom, and have been made by people of
all races, colors and creeds. Much of that sacrifice involved loss of life and
mistreatment based on arbitrary and even hateful notions. And all of it was
painful, even if for some more than others — and to varying degrees.
As an
African American woman, I know my ancestors sacrificed an incredible amount —
their lives, their livelihoods, their souls, even. But they did those things so
I could have a better life than they did — so I wouldn't have to have those
same painful experiences. And I don't. So why am I constantly being told to
celebrate their sacrifices and at the same time behave as though none of it
ever happened?
With the
election of President Obama, many (not all), cheered that a Black man was
finally in the White House as the leader of the free world and not just a
servant. We had come a long way, right? Well, yes, we had. But the bigger question is, did we really
believe that? And I think the answer is no.
While I
know for sure that racism in this country and elsewhere continues to exist (and
always will on some level — that's the nature of humanity), I have a very hard
time believing that it still exists to the degree that it did even 60 years
ago. And this is an important point to make and to understand. Think of it this
way: If last week 9 out of 10 people hated me because of the color of my skin,
and this week 1 out of those same 10 people still hate me because of the color of my
skin, I would consider that tremendous progress. So why would I continue to
look at the 9 who progressed as though they are the same as the 1 who has not?
This is what has happened in the U.S.
Many of President
Obama's supporters are ignoring the fact that an overwhelming majority of
people do not care that he is Black. Why don't we care? Because we've been taught, and have
learned, that race doesn't matter — it's the content of his character that
does. And yet, every criticism of him that is based on his political views or his
actions (which, surely, are based on his character) is met with the assertion
that the reason for the criticism is because he is Black.
There is
a double standard here by well-meaning people that does a great disservice to
President Obama and all people of color. To claim that we've overcome racism
enough for a Black man to be President, and yet that he is still subject to the
exact same level of racism of generations past is absurd. It simply cannot be
possible. And it places the same stereotype of previous generations directly on
him — that any poor decisions he makes are because he's Black. I would say
that's a big slap in the face — not only to President Obama, but to all the
men, women and children who sacrificed their lives, their livelihoods and their
souls in order for him to become the leader of the free world.
If you
believe a Black man is capable of leading the nation regardless of his skin
color, yet assume any and all criticism of his flaws is based only on race, you
are essentially saying that Blacks still aren't good enough — not even to be
flawed.
Monday, February 1, 2016
It's All Fun and Games 'Til the SJW's Get Involved.
Body positive. Gender equality. Forced tolerance under any other name is still propaganda, and it still smells.
No longer satisfied with brainwashing your kids on social media, tv shows and public schools, the Equality Brigade of Big Sister want to start indoctrination at the cradle. By social engineering the lumps of plastic your child can play with and what mascots adorn their breakfast cereal box they hope to build their socially conscience utopia brick by Lego brick.
"How many Lego mini-figures live on your street? With a planet-wide population of 4 billion, there are sure to be a few plastic folk nestling down the back of a sofa near you. But for all the mini-figures in the world, Lego does not produce a single one with a wheelchair or a disability?"
Of course this is not true, pirates with eye patches and peg legs have been available for quite sometime.( Yay for being represented by a yellow plastic toy?). The X-men set also has the iconic wheelchair bound character. I am sure there are more, but who cares. It's a toy. Toys are for play, for imagination expansion. You can remove arms and legs or wrap injuries in toilet paper bandages. You can get a sharpie when mom is not looking and draw scars.
The article goes on to bemoan the lack of wheel chair accessibility for Lego Airplanes. Seriously. This is adult grievance culture forcing its world view on the mind of a child. I can remember many times as a child, a certain figure was the wrong size for the entrance for whatever building you were playing with. ( Oh and you could actually cross play. Barbie did not have to play with just Barbie abodes, she could ride "in" your brothers Tonka truck) We used our imaginations and pretended it got through and placed said figure on the other side of door. Imagine it's wheelchair accessible, if you are a child and actually concerned with such, and go your merry way. Problem solved simply, without the retooling of a whole toy manufacturing complex.
No answer on how toy manufacturers are supposed to illustrate less visible handicaps, like mental illness or blindness
For years, child development researchers have been calling for unstructured play to encourage creativity in children. At one time coloring books were frowned upon. Pre-drawn illustrations were thought to handicap creativity. Experts thought a blank page was the best resource to bring out the artistry in preschoolers. Yet today the SJW wants to force your child to draw inside the lines. Having every toy possibly imagined and pre-made for each possible play scenario, surely inhibits inventive problem solving.
Of course that is the point. Control. "Wrong play" might lead to "wrong think" so let's be sure that no "wrong imagining" happens. We know their busybodying does not come from genuine concern for the less fortunate, because after all, these the same people that fight for the right to abort a disabled baby. When it actually matters, their concept of forced acceptance only goes so far.
Of course the bane of a feminist existence could not go unscathed. Mattel announced on Twitter, Time Magazines new cover featuring the new "realistic" body Barbie. Because that is what play time is all about, realism and not fantasy.
"Barbie has, to some extent, always been this bully to women. Her impossibly thin waist has taunted us, pointing out what for many of us is our biggest insecurity — our body size. Though she is carved plastic, she has screamed at us across generations, telling us our bodies aren't good enough. Now, that voice may quiet — albeit just a little."What a powerful moment and this is just the beginning... #TheDollEvolves #Barbie https://t.co/wuAgbidIby pic.twitter.com/e0tCmOxDlt— Barbie (@Barbie) January 28, 2016
When your toys are oppressing you, you really should seek help.
As a child I read a lot of books about little girls. Not once do I remember Laura Ingalls wondering if she was going to look like a corn cob when she grew up. Little girls through out the years were playing with molded clay dolls that vaguely had human shape. Sticks and clothespins wrapped in scrap cloth. Faceless primitive rag dolls misshapen and stuffed with saw dust never once pressured a child into wishing she too had a featureless visage. Having a real doll was once a rarity. You sure as heck didn't complain about it's dimensions
"As the old saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There’s just one problem: Despite our demographic diversity, not everyone’s beauty gets equal representation. However, new changes to one of the world’s most iconic (and influential) dolls are set to address this"
"In what is unquestionably Barbie’s "biggest change" since the toy first hit stores in 1959, Mattel is making room for other Barbies — 33 to be exact — to have a chance at dominating the shelves. And, to be honest, we’re all better for it."
Barbie is a toy, not a role model. To run an advertising campaign stating she is, is a bigger issue than her waist size. Of course Barbie is suffering the effects of the modern age. Kids are choosing electronics over plastic and ad campaign like this is causing product to move, initially. Why? Limited run items are highly collectible. How many stores is going to devote shelf space to all models and clothing sizes. How many parents are going to fork over for the different clothing for all the diverse body types. Skipper was never popular for just this reason. Matel needs to have realistic pocketbook standards. This is not realistic long term business model. Retooling to become less streamlined rather than more is backwards in today's market, but of course not a single SJW will mourn Barbie's passing should she indeed prove unprofitable. They got their feather, and if the bird dies, they will blame institutionalised misogyny etc and say it was too little too late.
Girls will never be a mermaid or Cinderella. Should we quit giving them toys that promote this false vision of the future? Most children will never grow up and own a Lamborghini, let's promote realistic driving standards. If we follow this logic, kids should only play with minivans. Allowing children to play with Disney castles or Barbie Dream Houses (or yachts) just sets them up for an unrealistic homing image. The will never be satisfied with their apartment complex or basic rancher. It's best to just nip all that imaginary play in the bud.
1 Corinthians 13:11-13King James Version (KJV)
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
Believer or not, this is good advice, for the most part. Children's play time is exactly that. Let them play. Let their creativity and imagination flow freely to solve the problems important to them. Let them be kids. Let the adults deal with all the serious issues that need serious people addressing them.
Sunday, January 31, 2016
Rats fleeing a sinking ship
Reading the news this morning, I came across an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that discussed how Johnson Controls is merging with Tyco and will be moving its corporate headquarters to Ireland, a move that will save the company and estimated $150 million/year in taxes. Who is Johnson Controls and what do they make you ask? Johnson Controls, among other things, is one of the three companies that makes batteries. Pop the hood of your car, and there is a very good chance you'll find a Johnson Controls manufactured car battery. They were "saved" by the GM bailout in 2008, and as the headline of the above linked article says, after receiving tax payer funds, they pull up anchor and leave.The move itself does not surprise me. The corporate tax rate in this nation is one of the highest in the world at 35%. It makes sense to me, and if I ran a major corporation and had an opportunity to relocate my corporate headquarters to an environment that is more favorable to business, I would. Its a no brainer, and yet many people are running around like the sky is falling. Here's my first hint for you. Corporations DO NOT PAY TAXES! Taxes are nothing more than a line item in a corporations budget. Its an expense. Expenses are reflected in how much a corporation's products and services cost. In other words, they are passed on to the consumer.
The comments both on Facebook and the article itself are an education in the difference in ideological differences. The left is lighting the the torches and are crying about how Johnson Controls has responsibilities to more than their shareholders and that they have a social responsibility as well by waxing poetic about how many people that $150 million in tax dollars would help the less fortunate.
The right, while disappointed in seeing another company leaving this great nation, they understand why. They see that the only way to get companies to want to stay here is by lowering our corporate tax rate. By doing so, companies will move here instead of leaving. They will expand their operations here, creating more jobs. Both of which expand the tax base and bring more money into the economy.
The right wants to make an environment more friendly to business rather than shame the companies and raise the tax rates.
One side supports freedom, the other side, a more limited form of freedom. I know which side I choose.
Sunday, January 24, 2016
Tools and power tools
Justice Antonin Scalia has been excoriated of late because of remarks he made in a recent supreme court case regarding affirmative action in college admissions. Justice Scalia stated that black students might be better off attending schools other than top-tier universities. An example of the commentary unleashed on Justice Scalia can be found here.
As a general observation made in the 21st century, Scalia's comments should be, admittedly, troubling. There is no reason that students of any race, sex, or religion should be expected to perform better or worse than their peers based purely on those identifiers. The problem is, as Scalia alluded to, the admission process, which, driven by the over-riding need for "diversity", may be preferentially admitting minority students...and Scalia is right, that is a problem.
Here is the thing...I grew up a middle class, suburban white boy...went to a state university and did well enough there that I got a scholarship under the National Science Foundation's Manpower Development Program to go to a small Eastern technical school with a reputation for being very good in science and engineering. I went. Some of my classmates were also there on scholarships, some had parents well off enough that they just paid the tuition...didn't matter. Small Eastern Technical School was not the type of place that attracted dilettantes and frat boy partiers. We were all hardcore nerds, geeks, and gearheads. We called ourselves "tools" and the geekiest among us were "power tools". We lived and breathed science. We attended class, filled reams of paper with notes, compared notes after class, and tried to trip up our professor on esoteric points of thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, or whatever the subject du jour was. I would wake up thinking about my lab work. I would work in my lab until all hours of the night, which frequently meant until the next day. Fun was drinking - SETS conveniently had two bars on campus - and "hacking", our word for what would now be called "pranks". Graffiti in not-easily-accessible places was popular...I'll take credit for "Free the DC-10" in the steam tunnel between Building 54 and Building 10, thank you very much. Another popular "hack" was pitching a refrigerator off the tallest building on campus onto the courtyard below - I can't say why. For obvious reasons this was not popular with the school administration and they began escalating security to prevent these hi-jinks. I became involved in a number of these refrigerator drops as my talent for picking lock proved useful in some cases.
Life at SETS was intense, probably the most intense four years of my life. There were women and blacks among my classmates. All there for "diversity" I don't doubt, because even back then it was important. Some were in the right place. Others were not. Which were which became obvious after a few minutes in a group discussion about a particular problem set. Those who had something to contribute were included in future study sessions, invited to have beers, and contributing to the next hack. Those who couldn't contribute were ignored. Let me point out here that this same decision process was also applied to white male graduate students. It was an extremely competitive environment, but not in a hostile way. I made many friends during my time there and still keep in touch with them, but we were all focused on graduating and getting a job and anyone who couldn't help with that was kicked to the curb. Survival of the fittest.
Back to Scalia's statements...if you are a minority - define the word as you like - and are admitted to a "top-tier university", I would advise that you think long and hard about accepting that offer. Ask yourself, "Am I that good? Can I do this, or am I just being accepted because I am <INSERT MINORITY STATUS HERE>?". If you truly believe you're that good, go for it. It will be an experience. But keep in mind, that "top tier" university will make a big deal about the number of "minority" students they admit to show how "diverse" they are. They could give a crap whether you graduate or not. If you step back and attend a "slower track" (Scalia's words, not mine) university, I will throw this out there: After you graduate, a few years down the road, out in the real world of private enterprise, you will enter the "What have you done for me lately?" zone. No one will care where your degree came from. If you are doing your job, being productive, and contributing to "shareholder value"..great. If not, your degree from a "top-tier" university won't mean shit.
Why I can't support Trump
"Make America Great again!" What a slogan. It inspires visions of better times. Simpler times. Of baseball, hot apple pie, and nights on the front porch with the family. It also conjures up darker thoughts and the realization that as great as this country is, it may not be living up to its potential. Those thoughts play into the anger that the majority of Trump supporters seem to have. Now don't misunderstand me, I am not happy with the direction this country is heading. However, unlike most of Trump's supporters, I am remaining objective and rational. Unlike most Trump supporters, I don't see a rose when I look at Trump and listen to his message. Quite the opposite in fact. I smell a rat.
I can hear it already, "How can you say that!?" I can hear the sound of thousands, no make that millions, of minds slamming shut instead of remaining open-minded enough to listen to my reasons. I can only guess as to the reason why that is, probably because so many people are uncomfortable with having their own beliefs challenged by different opinions.
Now, for those of you who are still with me, allow me to share with you my reasons.
I give you exhibit "A", several of the Don's flip flops:
"So what" you say. He has changed his positions you say. He has evolved. Everyone has the right to change their minds. You're right, everyone of us has the right to change our mind. And someone who is running for the highest office in the land should be expected by those who's vote they are courting to explain their apparent complete 180 degree flip in beliefs. I have been told that Trump does not owe me an explanation for his change of heart. I disagree wholeheartedly. IF he wants my vote, and the vote of others who feel as I do, then he most certainly does owe me, and the entirety of the American people an explanation.
Exhibit "B":
Trump Defends Campaign: 'I'm Being Divisive Right Now Because I Want To Win'
Donald Trump is the attack dog of politicians, he is extremely divisive. Listen to the man sometime with an open-mind and all you will hear is divisive rhetoric. His divisiveness is contagious and very evident when speaking to many of his supporters. Sure, Trump says he is being decisive because he wants to win, but what does it say about the man himself and his ability to inspire and lead if he has to resort to being decisive? A real leader can inspire without that sort of tactic.
Often when I am discussing my concerns with Trump supporters I am attacked in a very aggressive manner for daring to suggest that Trump is not my "man". I've been called everything from a liberal, to a freedom hater. I have been told that if I don't support Trump, that I might as well vote for Hilary, or Bernie. Let's get one thing straight right now, I vote for the person that best represents my beliefs. I vote for the person who will be uphold the Constitution of these United States of America. I will not be bullied into voting for someone who I feel does not meet that very basic qualification. Who I vote for is between me and the ballot box, and I vote for that person, not someone else. I find the entire premise of voting against someone else to be a very large part of the reason this country is in the mess it is in, but that is a topic for another post.
Exhibit "C":
The Don's "Positions"
I challenge you to read the positions of Donald Trump himself. For the most part they sound on point, but when you actually start digging into the "meat and potatoes" of those positions, you'll see that there is actually very little substance there. Now I don't expect any candidate to necessarily have all the answers. I expect the correct candidate to be able to surround themselves with people more knowledgeable about topics than they are. I expect that candidate to do their homework and listen to those advisors and spend a lot of time in deep thought. I expect that candidate to be able to clearly articulate the reason why they have taken the position they have taken, without resorting to rhetoric. I do not see any evidence of this with the Don. Instead I see a populist who is sticking his finger into the wind and seeing which way the proverbial wind is blowing before resorting to exhibit B, coming down on the side of the more popular opinion. In other words, the one that is more likely to get him elected. I don't trust someone who's only concern is popularity in real life, nor do I trust that sort of individual with my vote.
To those of you who have made it this far with me, these are the major reasons why I don't support Donald Trump for President. I do not feel he is the right man for the job. That is not to say that I wouldn't support him having an appointed position within the next President's administration, perhaps something suited to his business experience.
I can hear it already, "How can you say that!?" I can hear the sound of thousands, no make that millions, of minds slamming shut instead of remaining open-minded enough to listen to my reasons. I can only guess as to the reason why that is, probably because so many people are uncomfortable with having their own beliefs challenged by different opinions.
Now, for those of you who are still with me, allow me to share with you my reasons.
I give you exhibit "A", several of the Don's flip flops:
"So what" you say. He has changed his positions you say. He has evolved. Everyone has the right to change their minds. You're right, everyone of us has the right to change our mind. And someone who is running for the highest office in the land should be expected by those who's vote they are courting to explain their apparent complete 180 degree flip in beliefs. I have been told that Trump does not owe me an explanation for his change of heart. I disagree wholeheartedly. IF he wants my vote, and the vote of others who feel as I do, then he most certainly does owe me, and the entirety of the American people an explanation.
Exhibit "B":
Trump Defends Campaign: 'I'm Being Divisive Right Now Because I Want To Win'
Donald Trump is the attack dog of politicians, he is extremely divisive. Listen to the man sometime with an open-mind and all you will hear is divisive rhetoric. His divisiveness is contagious and very evident when speaking to many of his supporters. Sure, Trump says he is being decisive because he wants to win, but what does it say about the man himself and his ability to inspire and lead if he has to resort to being decisive? A real leader can inspire without that sort of tactic.
Often when I am discussing my concerns with Trump supporters I am attacked in a very aggressive manner for daring to suggest that Trump is not my "man". I've been called everything from a liberal, to a freedom hater. I have been told that if I don't support Trump, that I might as well vote for Hilary, or Bernie. Let's get one thing straight right now, I vote for the person that best represents my beliefs. I vote for the person who will be uphold the Constitution of these United States of America. I will not be bullied into voting for someone who I feel does not meet that very basic qualification. Who I vote for is between me and the ballot box, and I vote for that person, not someone else. I find the entire premise of voting against someone else to be a very large part of the reason this country is in the mess it is in, but that is a topic for another post.
Exhibit "C":
The Don's "Positions"
I challenge you to read the positions of Donald Trump himself. For the most part they sound on point, but when you actually start digging into the "meat and potatoes" of those positions, you'll see that there is actually very little substance there. Now I don't expect any candidate to necessarily have all the answers. I expect the correct candidate to be able to surround themselves with people more knowledgeable about topics than they are. I expect that candidate to do their homework and listen to those advisors and spend a lot of time in deep thought. I expect that candidate to be able to clearly articulate the reason why they have taken the position they have taken, without resorting to rhetoric. I do not see any evidence of this with the Don. Instead I see a populist who is sticking his finger into the wind and seeing which way the proverbial wind is blowing before resorting to exhibit B, coming down on the side of the more popular opinion. In other words, the one that is more likely to get him elected. I don't trust someone who's only concern is popularity in real life, nor do I trust that sort of individual with my vote.
To those of you who have made it this far with me, these are the major reasons why I don't support Donald Trump for President. I do not feel he is the right man for the job. That is not to say that I wouldn't support him having an appointed position within the next President's administration, perhaps something suited to his business experience.
Saturday, January 23, 2016
Sex, lies, and nerds
Over on Facebook a few days back, a link to this story in Forbes about sexual harassment in the astronomy community was posted in a private group. Alison Paige made the following, fairly astute, observation:
I'll throw something else into this mix: Hard science academicians past a certain age, i.e., those that were hired before political correctness and diversity became the driving principles for higher education, are more likely to be conservative politically than their soft science and liberal arts colleagues. As a consequence, all of their actions are going to be viewed through a liberal political lens that places them under far more scrutiny than, say, the politically correct English literature professor who may be staging Lolita reenactments in his classroom to bring Nabakov's writing "alive".
Having said all this, the reality of higher education in America is that heterosexual white male professors are indeed dinosaurs and are being replaced by a more "diverse" faculty. Whether or not these professors are forced out by charges of sexual harassment, real or imagined, or simply retire, the end result is the same: A faculty selected to be culturally diverse and politically homogeneous. This is not to say that these new faculty are not talented and, in some cases, extremely talented, but when a significant basis for their hiring is their sexual identification and/or race and political views, they are not required to be.
I could go on and on about all the reasons I believe that higher education is dying in America, but I'll save that commentary for another day and end this bit of Saturday morning amusement by making a prediction: At present, American universities are net importers of foreign graduate students, mostly from China and India. With ten year - fifteen, at the outside, this trend will reverse and serious American hard science students will be learning Mandarin and heading to China to learn their trade.
Astronomy, physics, computer science, engineering. Is anyone surprised that white males who love science so much that they participated in science fairs willingly and gym class only because it was required and played chess or D&D instead of attending the prom are really bad at communicating with women? These are the men who were bullied by teacher-coaches and fellow classmates repeatedly all through their grade school and HS years. They have no social interaction skills.As a white male who voluntarily participated in science fairs, hated gym class, and played on my high school chess team - this was pre-Dungeons & Dragons - and then went on to get an advanced degree in materials science, I can affirm that there is a lot of truth to this. People who go into the hard sciences, in general, don't come equipped with a full set of social graces. Put these socially inept men on today's college campuses where even complimenting a woman's appearance is construed as an act of overt male aggression tantamount to rape and, well...yeah, sexual harassment charges will fly, regardless of whether the alleged act of harassment was real or committed with the most innocent of intentions.
I'll throw something else into this mix: Hard science academicians past a certain age, i.e., those that were hired before political correctness and diversity became the driving principles for higher education, are more likely to be conservative politically than their soft science and liberal arts colleagues. As a consequence, all of their actions are going to be viewed through a liberal political lens that places them under far more scrutiny than, say, the politically correct English literature professor who may be staging Lolita reenactments in his classroom to bring Nabakov's writing "alive".
Having said all this, the reality of higher education in America is that heterosexual white male professors are indeed dinosaurs and are being replaced by a more "diverse" faculty. Whether or not these professors are forced out by charges of sexual harassment, real or imagined, or simply retire, the end result is the same: A faculty selected to be culturally diverse and politically homogeneous. This is not to say that these new faculty are not talented and, in some cases, extremely talented, but when a significant basis for their hiring is their sexual identification and/or race and political views, they are not required to be.
I could go on and on about all the reasons I believe that higher education is dying in America, but I'll save that commentary for another day and end this bit of Saturday morning amusement by making a prediction: At present, American universities are net importers of foreign graduate students, mostly from China and India. With ten year - fifteen, at the outside, this trend will reverse and serious American hard science students will be learning Mandarin and heading to China to learn their trade.
Friday, January 22, 2016
The Economics of Blue Nail Polish.
Did my nails the other day. Now, I don't do that often, but when I do, I lean towards blues, teals and other non traditional colors. I even have a lovely shade of olive drab I picked up a few months ago. I certainly don't need all these colors, ( honestly don't need any..). But isn't it nice that I have all of them to choose from
That right there, is the beauty of a capitalist system, choice. I stroll along through a store, something shiny and bright catches my eye. I may see one, two or three different colors I need ( don't), and plop they go in the buggy. To the counter I go with my money, and the deal is done.
Someone somewhere in the nail polish factory decided to add new and different colors, and people bought them. They sold so well, they kept adding more and more colors. And now we have the wonder that is the cosmetics aisle. The more we buy the more they make. The more they make, the more we buy. The market dries up, and production stops.
Socialism is anti-choice. Socialism says you can have too many choices, that other things are more important than choosing nail color, the planet is boiling for Pete's sake. If you don't believe me, ask Bernie Sanders
"You can't just continue growth for the sake of growth in a world in which we are struggling with climate change and all kinds of environmental problems. All right? You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country. I don't think the media appreciates the kind of stress that ordinary Americans are working on."
Choice is bad, gosh darn it. Everyone should just use the approved scent, flavor, colors. Everyone should drink the prescribed amount of the approved beverage and be happy. Do it for the planet.
It fascinates me, the people that would vote for Bernie and his anti choice rhetoric are typically those with rainbow locks, who stand in line at a specialty coffee store for diverse beverages chosen from a varied menu, and ponder seriously over the wide range of free range tofu at the local organic market. People who proudly proclaim their individuality, clamor for forced conformity, in the name of social justice and income equality, never equating equality with sameness.
Diversity happens when there are choices to be made. The permutations available in our capitalistic American society are limited only by our imaginations. What grand imaginations they are, too! Why anyone would want to limit us to centrally planned choices is beyond my comprehension. Why anyone would willingly vote for someone that proudly proclaims he would limit your choices, even more so.
Sunday, January 17, 2016
So how is life on Planet Pollyanna? I hear it's nice there...
So...some privileged white girl, named Tricia Bishop, wrote this for the Baltimore Sun, where she argues that there should be a national database where one could go and find out which of your friends or parents of your children's friends owned guns...so you could stay away from or keep your kids away from these dangerous sociopaths.
She states in her column, "I know how to stay out of the line of Baltimore's illegal gunfire; I have the luxury of being white and middle class in a largely segregated city..."
Ignoring the racism that is implicit in this statement, I will just say, No, Tricia. You don't know shit. All you know is the privileged sheltered life you have lived in since your yuppie parents spawned you. You live in a white section of Baltimore where the police actually patrol and enforce the law...and you turn a blind eye - if you are even that aware - when they profile "undesirables" and make sure they stay clear of your little enclave of civilized life. Profiling isn't wrong when it keeps your little piece of sophisticated, urbane life safe, is it?
Not everyone enjoys your luxury. I live in a city where violence, while infrequent, is random and, for the most part, class-insensitive and the ineffective police force does little more than chronicle crime as it happens. Prior to moving here, I never felt the need to own a gun for personal protection. I do now as do the majority of my neighbors...and by the way, in the 15 years I have lived here, in a development where several thousand people live, the number of accidental shootings, fatal or otherwise? Zero.
As a parent, I understand your concern for the safety of your kids. Guns really are dangerous. So is your car. Your kitchen knives, your collection of cleaning supplies, power tools, if you have any, anything you have that plugs into an electrical outlet are all potentially dangerous things that could kill you or your kids if misused....and this is just inside your house. Once your child walks out the front door, the number of potential pathways to their demise multiply.
To your point, your kids' friends also live in houses where they are surrounded by all manner of dangerous devices and materials. Are you advocating for a national database that would identify owners of tables saws, kitchen knives, spray cans of insecticide, and anything else that could potentially injure your children? No. You don't because you see the utility of having these things in your house and, as a responsible parent, take some precautions to keep them away from your kids, as well as teaching them that these things are dangerous and could hurt or even kill them. You also assume that your children's friends' parents are being similarly responsible, which is why you willingly place your kids in their charge whenever they go over to play.
The thought that a gun in the house is going to turn responsible parents that you trust with your kids' lives into crazy, knuckle-dragging rednecks is absurd. A little research will demonstrate that your child is far, far more likely to die from drowning in your neighbor's pool than being shot by a gun they left lying around.
She states in her column, "I know how to stay out of the line of Baltimore's illegal gunfire; I have the luxury of being white and middle class in a largely segregated city..."
Ignoring the racism that is implicit in this statement, I will just say, No, Tricia. You don't know shit. All you know is the privileged sheltered life you have lived in since your yuppie parents spawned you. You live in a white section of Baltimore where the police actually patrol and enforce the law...and you turn a blind eye - if you are even that aware - when they profile "undesirables" and make sure they stay clear of your little enclave of civilized life. Profiling isn't wrong when it keeps your little piece of sophisticated, urbane life safe, is it?
Not everyone enjoys your luxury. I live in a city where violence, while infrequent, is random and, for the most part, class-insensitive and the ineffective police force does little more than chronicle crime as it happens. Prior to moving here, I never felt the need to own a gun for personal protection. I do now as do the majority of my neighbors...and by the way, in the 15 years I have lived here, in a development where several thousand people live, the number of accidental shootings, fatal or otherwise? Zero.
As a parent, I understand your concern for the safety of your kids. Guns really are dangerous. So is your car. Your kitchen knives, your collection of cleaning supplies, power tools, if you have any, anything you have that plugs into an electrical outlet are all potentially dangerous things that could kill you or your kids if misused....and this is just inside your house. Once your child walks out the front door, the number of potential pathways to their demise multiply.
To your point, your kids' friends also live in houses where they are surrounded by all manner of dangerous devices and materials. Are you advocating for a national database that would identify owners of tables saws, kitchen knives, spray cans of insecticide, and anything else that could potentially injure your children? No. You don't because you see the utility of having these things in your house and, as a responsible parent, take some precautions to keep them away from your kids, as well as teaching them that these things are dangerous and could hurt or even kill them. You also assume that your children's friends' parents are being similarly responsible, which is why you willingly place your kids in their charge whenever they go over to play.
The thought that a gun in the house is going to turn responsible parents that you trust with your kids' lives into crazy, knuckle-dragging rednecks is absurd. A little research will demonstrate that your child is far, far more likely to die from drowning in your neighbor's pool than being shot by a gun they left lying around.
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Racism Is Not Unintentional
I keep reading about how racism is systemic and only can be directed by those in power. In other words, White people have held power over Black people (and other people of color) since the U.S. was founded, so no matter what has happened since then — no matter how prosperous Blacks have become, or the fact that a Black man is the leader of the free world — Whites still hold the power, so Black people are still oppressed and cannot be racist.
As a result of this thinking, White people are being convinced that asking questions about someone's difference (in the name of diversity and getting to know a culture other than their own) is racist.
In the 1990s, corporations were told that they weren't diverse enough because too many White men held positions of power. Departments of Diversity were created, often headed by a woman and/or person of color and/or gay or lesbian (the bi-sexuals and transgendered hadn’t been offended yet — and weren’t even recognized in their own “circle” of “different” sexual behavior), in the name of creating equality. So-called “affinity” groups were formed: Black Employee Networks, Asian Employee Networks, Left-handed Green-eyed Lesbians with Plus Seven Wizard Points Employee Network. Every “specialized” group wanted to be recognized for being different. In the name of “equality and diversity”, these groups essentially bullied their way into silos of difference. “Celebrate me because I’m different!” “Celebrate me because I’m special!” “Celebrate me because I’ve been held down by the White man!” I think it started as wanting be accepted, but it quickly devolved into wanting to be different but not different.
I was included in a class action lawsuit because of the color of my skin. The lawsuit was intended to give disadvantaged Blacks in the corporate world an opportunity to advance their education so they could move up the corporate ladder. I already had a Bachelor’s degree from a prestigious university, and was being told that I needed to take advantage of this “opportunity.” I took a class that interested me, but that had nothing to do with advancing me in the position I held. It was “free” money. Except it wasn’t. The company paid for it, and employee salaries (across the board) were likely limited because the company had this lawsuit they had to pay for. I am grateful for the “educational opportunity experience” I got, but in hindsight, I didn’t learn any more than I had learned in the same class in high school — and I got to take that class because of my intellect and ability, not because of the color of my skin or my gender.
This post is not about my own hubris. Please bear with me.
A quick Google search says that a “system” is (1) “a set of connected things or parts forming a complex whole, in particular” and (2) “a set of principles or procedures according to which something is done; an organized scheme or method.” Wikipedia (which is where most people rely on their definitions of things) says a system is a “ set of interacting or dependent component parts forming a complex/intricate whole.”
So where is the other side of this oppression/diversity system? If Whites hold the power and people of color are oppressed as part of this system, that means both sides are, in fact colluding. It means both sides are responsible. So why are Whites obliged to feel guilty for their success while people of color are continually oppressed for their lack of success? If Whites set a standard that works economically, educationally, socially, etc., that works for everyone, and people of color reject that just because Whites set it up, those people of color are part of that system that keeps them down because of their own rejection of people not of their color set it up.
According to the definition, a system needs more than one side to operate. And the people “in power” can only operate as long as the “oppressed” acquiesce to being the ones “not in power.” So I say to the “oppressed,” stop dwelling on the past. Stop demanding equality so long as you are only seeking revenge for the actions of the past. Equality has existed for a number of years for people of color. We have the opportunity to change the future for ourselves. Many of us have. We blame no one but ourselves for not taking advantage of the opportunities presented to us.
You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
Tuesday, January 12, 2016
Better Men for a Safer You!
Two new, heretofore undiscovered duties of the Federal government have been discovered. The duty of Preventing Gun Violence and its sister clause, Keeping Us Safe. They are Article 9 3/4 subsection A & B, respectively, or something, so don't feel bad for missing it.In ensuring the government meets its duty to Prevent Gun Violence and Keeping Us Safe there is not a gun that exists, that a liberal does not want to grab, nor is there a gun control law written, that they do not want passed.
"But sillies, we don't want to take your guns"
Oh, really?
“We will get away from this notion that some gun cases are mere possession cases,” said Richard M. Aborn, president of the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City, who helped to spearhead the new approach. “When somebody makes a decision to pick up a gun, that’s like a pre-murder case.”
"Aha! You wish to apply to purchase a gun! Therefore, you must want to commit murder most foul! Since, you sir, are indeed a murderer in thought, though not yet in deed, you most definitely must be denied possession of a gun."
Pre-crime. I am on the record, repeatedly, stating that the simple act of wanting to own a gun will make you either mentally ill or a criminal to those that wish for the power to dispense rights to the deserved.
CNN published this piece after Obama's lecture on the badness of an armed citizenry. ( The one where he looked a survivor of rape, in the eyes, and told her that a gun would not keep her safer.)
"So, what should Obama do?
The President needs executive actions that cannot be obstructed by Congress. That's only possible under a declared National State of Emergency for the Gun Violence Epidemic."
Basically he wants the president to martial law to control guns the way the left sees fit.
Besides not having accurate facts to back up his claims, this guy is not only wanting to get rid of due process, but also wants to get rid of one of the most foundational principles of our Constitution, the checks and balances that keep our co-equal branches of government in line. He wants his ruler to have a strong hand when dealing with the issues he agrees with, not giving any thought to what will happen if the party he disapproves of gains the position of power. I would attribute that to not only short sightedness, but incredible hubris. They do not think they can lose.
To the anti gun crowd, the inanimate gun is the problem they can solve. The human heart is one they can not. Not directly anyway. The world will be the better place they know it can be if only enough laws are passed controlling our actions. If only enough media outlets and schools show us the proper way of thinking we will come to appreciate their efforts.
The safety of the populace can not be left to mere men. That Great Responsibility falls on to the benevolent shoulders of our Elected Officials. Through the power of the ballot box, these former examples of humanity are transformed to Better Men (or Women) better suited for the job of protecting us from ourselves.
Thursday, January 7, 2016
De Facto Sharia
As I mentioned in a previous post, Germany is having a bit of a rape culture problem ( though to be honest, it's a cultural rape problem, but whatevs). The revised number is now up to 150 reported complaints during a 1000 man violent sexual assault rampage. The descriptions of the men were specific and quite problematic for authorities. Seems all of the perpetrators had a belief system in common. Most of them were of Arab or African origin ( as per witness description), some specifically, Syrian refugees, by their own admission. They literally told police that “I am Syrian. You have to treat me kindly. Mrs Merkel invited me"
Merkel, Time's Person Of the Year, herself, has come out with strong condemnation, of the victims of course, for not taking the proper precautions. While not specifying head to toe coverings and related male escorts when going in public, one can only assume.
Thus, de facto sharia, without even a fight. The strong man is tied, he shaved his own head, and can only watch as his women are raped and sold as chattel.
Here in the Evil Patriarchal bastion USA, feminists have been decrying words, glances and thoughts as rape. A man talks to you on campus, rape. If he looks at you, rape. If he thinks you are unattractive and refuses to have sex with you, rapity rape. One can only hope that Merkel can take time from governing/ruining Germany long enough to do a speaking tour of American universities.
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
#BLM - Blame, Lies, and Manipulation
Allow me to just spitball here for a moment....something just ain't sitting right....
If you are the average supporter and follower of the Black Lives Matter movement, I feel sadness and sorrow for you. You are following pied pipers, siren singers appealing to your emotional confliction; fiddlers deftly running their bows across the strings of your doubts, your guilts, your needs, your unsatisfied longing to be a part of something larger than yourself. If you are an organizer of this racialist variant of grievance stoking leftism, I feel nothing but contempt for you. You are lying, manipulating, merchants of blame for fun and profit. Peddlers of nebulous angers, loosely defined grievances; the wares that you hawk are cheap replicas of history, a history that you diminish with a rebranding campaign based on an appeal to nostalgia. Black Lives Matter is nothing more than the next rearrangement in the Progressive Socialist shell game where slight of hand and distraction is employed to render the participant unaware that the pea of secular salvation has already been discarded and all promise of payoff is as empty as the three half shells sitting on the table before them.
The Wikipedia page for Black Lives Matter (I assume, authored by supporters or organizers themselves) is the usual ideological tossed salad of vague idealism that purports to be, “a decentralized network and has no formal hierarchy or structure.” A patent phrase that has been used as a tactic of feigned non-responsibility for acts of the few in the name of the many. Acts inspired by a few core,“activists,” that often lead to acts of violence by the,“allied,” but as equally (non)responsible (individual) actors within, “movements,” where there are no,“individuals,” only the,“cause,” under the guise of,"peaceful protest," while absolving the movement's role in inspiring acts of disruption, looting, riot, and siege as acts not advocated by the whole, but wholly supported.
The tactics, language, sentiments, and slogans have all been used by the Occupy Movement, Critical Mass, $15 Dollar an Hour activists and agitators, Labor Union activists and agitators, the drive to Recall Walker movement, the LGBT rights movement, the Anti-War movement, AdBusters, PETA, Code Pink, Moms Demand Action, Pussy Riot, Earth First; leftist activist front groups of generic, umbrella chagrin that invest their futures in blaming the past for solutions unrealized. Solutions never presented. Solutions talked about in terms unrealizable. Movements in the Sixties, co-opted from nascent movements of the Forties and Fifties, in reaction to romantic desires borne of the Thirties, attempted but never realized since the 1800's.
Ironic, in a way, that the stated desires and goals of a 21st century black liberation movement is so rooted in the philosophies of a 19th century German, co-opting and employing the tactics of a 20th century Jew, whilst supporting in personhood the BDS Movement. Melding the racial and ethnic hate and blame ethos of a supposed preacher with a mob mentality approach to "justice."
I expect this flavor of incongruous froth from organizers of coffee house revolutions. What is sad, is that otherwise reasonable people are now taking swigs of that bitter brew and finding it delicious.