In a decade, I expect some psychological experts to gather and discuss at length the growing problem of weak-minded 'snowflake' behavior adults....reaching into the early to mid-30s, and unable to really make it in life. I think the experts will eventually come to suggest that a 90-day boot-camp atmosphere is the only way to help these 'kids' recover.
The boot-camp?
Basically, you'd have to them in some rural setting, and get them up at 5 AM. They'd have to be responsible for some farm-animals, and I would recommend a hearty breakfast around 7 AM with bacon (lot of it), some biscuits, gravy, and eggs over easy.
Then I'd send them off to some general store atmosphere and force them to sit and listen to five guys talk about regular non-political things for three hours, but force the snowflake kid to just sit and listen....not to argue with folks.
Around lunch, I'd send over to bar-b-q shop, and offer up some Pabst Blue Ribbon beer. In the afternoons, I'd find some cattle activity, or snake-pit, or maybe something slightly dangerous so that they didn't get all fearful of woeful things.
Come early evening, I'd turn on the TV for an hour of Andy Griffith, then maybe an hour of Judge Judy.
My guess is that around the 12th week, they'd get all this snowflake stuff out of their system, and you'd graduate them with a certificate.
Thursday, 5 July 2018
A What If Scenario
I don't tend to do a lot of 'thinking' over the 4th of July. To me as a kid, it meant a day at valley in Tennessee, where you'd go for an afternoon of softball, stew, and gossip by local folks. My dad made this a yearly activity when I was growing up in Alabama.
In later years, you'd go to base events with an evening display of fireworks, and some musical entertainment.
I doubt if in the 1776 era, folks sat around and discussed how the day would be marked or celebrated. But this brings me to the odd topic of 'what-if', and if things had gone differently.
In this era of 1760, King George III was the guy who set the path for what we have today.....basically by screwing up and not grasping the mess at hand.
So, let us say that King George III woke up in 1760, and decreed that there would be representation in the House of Lords and the House of Commons for 13 'lands'. Then let's suggest that he limited military personnel to be brought from England to America, and instead.....limited it to just 3,000 men to be spread around five key forts of America.
The King might have then turned to the thirteen governors and say.....here, if you think you need soldiers for some reason to defend against Indians.....it's you who will form a militia, and it's you who will tax your own people for that militia, and it's you who will disband that militia when the threat is wrapped up.
Then an odd thing would have happened. The revolution would have never occurred. George Washington would have likely be called up and been some Colonel of the Virginia Militia and never risen higher than that position.
The war of 1812? It would have likely never occurred.
The Louisiana Purchase? It would have likely never occurred. In fact, you could sit and draw a reasonable map of the US in 1820....which extended to the Mississippi River, and that was the basis of the entire country.
France? I think Napoleon would have gone to some idea of suggesting massive migration of French people into the Louisiana to Missouri region. Thousands in the 1800 to 1820 period would have moved there and the European conflict would have been avoided.
Slavery? I think the King would have slowly written up enough proclamations that no further slaves would have arrived after the 1810 period. The bulk-cotton plantations would have been forced through various changes, and I think slavery would have likely ended by the 1840s. No Civil War, and Lincoln would have never been 'delivered'.
WW I? The King could have called upon the states (the eastern sector of the nation) to support the war-front, and we would have been there by late 1914. By the end of 1915, the war would have ended because of the US participation in this war early on. Without the massive defeat of 1918.....Germany never goes through the bad years of the 1920s.
Somewhere in this 1920 to 1940 era.....like Australia, we would have gone to become our own nation, and likely forged some relationship with French-Mississippi region.
Life would have been different.
In later years, you'd go to base events with an evening display of fireworks, and some musical entertainment.
I doubt if in the 1776 era, folks sat around and discussed how the day would be marked or celebrated. But this brings me to the odd topic of 'what-if', and if things had gone differently.
In this era of 1760, King George III was the guy who set the path for what we have today.....basically by screwing up and not grasping the mess at hand.
So, let us say that King George III woke up in 1760, and decreed that there would be representation in the House of Lords and the House of Commons for 13 'lands'. Then let's suggest that he limited military personnel to be brought from England to America, and instead.....limited it to just 3,000 men to be spread around five key forts of America.
The King might have then turned to the thirteen governors and say.....here, if you think you need soldiers for some reason to defend against Indians.....it's you who will form a militia, and it's you who will tax your own people for that militia, and it's you who will disband that militia when the threat is wrapped up.
Then an odd thing would have happened. The revolution would have never occurred. George Washington would have likely be called up and been some Colonel of the Virginia Militia and never risen higher than that position.
The war of 1812? It would have likely never occurred.
The Louisiana Purchase? It would have likely never occurred. In fact, you could sit and draw a reasonable map of the US in 1820....which extended to the Mississippi River, and that was the basis of the entire country.
France? I think Napoleon would have gone to some idea of suggesting massive migration of French people into the Louisiana to Missouri region. Thousands in the 1800 to 1820 period would have moved there and the European conflict would have been avoided.
Slavery? I think the King would have slowly written up enough proclamations that no further slaves would have arrived after the 1810 period. The bulk-cotton plantations would have been forced through various changes, and I think slavery would have likely ended by the 1840s. No Civil War, and Lincoln would have never been 'delivered'.
WW I? The King could have called upon the states (the eastern sector of the nation) to support the war-front, and we would have been there by late 1914. By the end of 1915, the war would have ended because of the US participation in this war early on. Without the massive defeat of 1918.....Germany never goes through the bad years of the 1920s.
Somewhere in this 1920 to 1940 era.....like Australia, we would have gone to become our own nation, and likely forged some relationship with French-Mississippi region.
Life would have been different.
Wednesday, 4 July 2018
Who Exactly is a Fact-Checker
I read some piece today....where people seem to state that they are 'professional' fact-checkers. I sat there for about ten minutes.....trying to imagine this status, and how you got to this position.
Is there some college-degree for fact-checking? No.
Is there some paid job with IBM or the NFL, for fact-checking? Well.....no.
Is there some job with the CIA for fact-checking? I've never heard of them employing folks to be fact-checkers.
So I looked it up...for qualifications. What folks say is that you need a degree in library-science, or possibly journalism. Then they say that you ought to have had several years (hint: a decade) in some field of information. Some folks even said if your degree was in English-language....you'd be Ok.
Then you'd get hired by someone, and that's all you do....fact-check.
Is there much work in this? That's the part that bothers me. I can find no real commentary that you'd be hard at work for forty hours a week. You'd just get handed some news piece, and someone from the head-office would ask....is this a fact? And then you'd go and read for several hours, and come to some balanced decision that yes, it is, or no, it's not. Beyond that, you might be sitting there a good bit each day.
I worked in a job once (for three years) where I basically came in....did about an hour's worth of work, and then sat there for five hours a day just reading newspapers, or trying to just act busy. I get the impression that these fact-checkers kinda fall into that category.
An occupation that you could spend thirty years in? NO, I just don't see that much value.
What bothers me is that you also now have....fact-checkers to the fact-checkers....meaning that the first crew might be lying a bit or just not capable of fact-checking. And if there is a group of fact-checkers checking fact-checkers.....you can assume that there is also a group of fact-checkers who countering the fact-checkers, who are checking the fact-checkers.
Way too much facts, if you ask me.
Is there some college-degree for fact-checking? No.
Is there some paid job with IBM or the NFL, for fact-checking? Well.....no.
Is there some job with the CIA for fact-checking? I've never heard of them employing folks to be fact-checkers.
So I looked it up...for qualifications. What folks say is that you need a degree in library-science, or possibly journalism. Then they say that you ought to have had several years (hint: a decade) in some field of information. Some folks even said if your degree was in English-language....you'd be Ok.
Then you'd get hired by someone, and that's all you do....fact-check.
Is there much work in this? That's the part that bothers me. I can find no real commentary that you'd be hard at work for forty hours a week. You'd just get handed some news piece, and someone from the head-office would ask....is this a fact? And then you'd go and read for several hours, and come to some balanced decision that yes, it is, or no, it's not. Beyond that, you might be sitting there a good bit each day.
I worked in a job once (for three years) where I basically came in....did about an hour's worth of work, and then sat there for five hours a day just reading newspapers, or trying to just act busy. I get the impression that these fact-checkers kinda fall into that category.
An occupation that you could spend thirty years in? NO, I just don't see that much value.
What bothers me is that you also now have....fact-checkers to the fact-checkers....meaning that the first crew might be lying a bit or just not capable of fact-checking. And if there is a group of fact-checkers checking fact-checkers.....you can assume that there is also a group of fact-checkers who countering the fact-checkers, who are checking the fact-checkers.
Way too much facts, if you ask me.
Pondering Upon Meddling
"Findings by the intelligence community that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump win were "accurate and on point," according to an unclassified report and accompanying statement by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence released Tuesday."
-- Fox News, 3 July 2018
The one and only question to ask....what if they (the Russians) did meddle in 2016, and then you went back to find that yes.....they also meddled in 2012, 2008, 2004, 2000, 1996, and even 1992?
What if Barack Obama was the result of Russian meddling?
What if Bush was the result of Russian meddling?
What if the Russians meddle in the mid-term elections, and have helped John McCain win all of these Senate elections?
Man, when you reach this stage of meddling.....you might even be able to arrange for Roseanne to get doped up, say something stupid, getting her removed from the TV show, and then rearrange for her to appear six months later in a totally different show, and get fantastic ratings.
Heck, you might even arrange the NCAA football business enough to allow the University of Alabama to continually appear as 'champions'.
The Right-Wing Bernie
There was a piece out there yesterday, which kinda led me in circles. There's some accusation that Bernie Sanders (you remember him from the 2016 campaign) while awful socialist in nature (he likes to admit it and grin while in agreement).....has been said by the new socialists appearing in public now.....to be too right-wing for them. Yes, as left as you or I might observe Bernie.....they say he's too right-wing.
My brother notes that Bernie is civil in his discourse, and he thinks that where Bernie fails the left-wing socialist 'test'. This led me to pondering process.
Is it possible that even today....Karl Marx (the guy who wrote the book on socialism and communism) would fail the test, and be called a right-wing guy? It's possible.
Would Lenin fail the socialist test, and be called right-wing? It's hard to say.
The general test?
Well, first you have to believe anything capitalist is evil....so you need to at least desire to live under a bridge and condemn capitalism daily.
Second, you need to believe that everyone that has money.....needs to be taxed to the extent that they are flat-broke like you, and that money is shared out with you and your fellow socialists.
Third, you need to believe that unions can only serve the greater good of mankind. The fact that they might be corrupt? Discount that real quick.
Fourth, you need to believe that the world would be a better place without the police. Police just get into the middle of everything and make it all worse.
Fifth, the answer to all problems always goes back to more government.
Sixth, you believe in open discussions as long as everyone talks about your subject, in the correct way, and agrees. If they can't agree with you.....you need to end the discussion.
Seventh, you compare everyone you meet on some Hitler-scale, and disagreeable folks generally rate near a '8' on this scale.
Eighth, generally.....you are always pro-marijuana. You'd like to see it legalized, but not taxed.
Ninth, you generally enjoy periods of unemployment....the longer, the more entertaining it can be.
Tenth, you like the color black when picking clothing for public appearances.
Eleventh, you enjoy showing just a hint of violent character....up until the point where you end up at some protest with ex-Marines.
Twelfth, you always cite that such-and-such European country is real socialist, and then always get shocked when you see a fair amount of wealth existing in that country. You always get a bit embarrassed when admitting that you've never been to Europe, and the most socialist place you've ever been was San Francisco. Course, then you admit you were awful doped up when walking around San Francisco, and you might have just dreamed a bunch of stuff up.
Thirteenth, you live in constant fear of turning right-wing. It's bad enough that you often visit a mental health guy and talk over this stress in your life. All he can suggest is to smoke more marijuana, and keep capitalist people out of your life. Your doctor even hints that he might be capitalist because he drives a BMW. You attend meetings in your early 30's to talk over your feelings and learn that other socialists are suffering the same stress.
Fourteenth, you keep citing that western democracy has failed, but you never seem to talk about the Greeks, Plato, Aristotle, or that nutcase Socrates. You generally admit that you never studied philosophy, or sat in a true history class.
Fifteenth, your day is consumed thinking of a large number of folks as being 'lesser' in terms of comparison to you. It starts out with coffee, and then continues on through the morning. By noon, you have to do a double-joint to continue your line of thinking. You always see happy people as a threat, because they just aren't wise enough to see the terrible world up close and personal.
Finally, you get to some peak and collapse....when dad or mom cut off the $500 a month that they've been sending you to support your 'life-under-the-bridge' routine. Then you have to resort to capitalism, and deliver pizzas.
My brother notes that Bernie is civil in his discourse, and he thinks that where Bernie fails the left-wing socialist 'test'. This led me to pondering process.
Is it possible that even today....Karl Marx (the guy who wrote the book on socialism and communism) would fail the test, and be called a right-wing guy? It's possible.
Would Lenin fail the socialist test, and be called right-wing? It's hard to say.
The general test?
Well, first you have to believe anything capitalist is evil....so you need to at least desire to live under a bridge and condemn capitalism daily.
Second, you need to believe that everyone that has money.....needs to be taxed to the extent that they are flat-broke like you, and that money is shared out with you and your fellow socialists.
Third, you need to believe that unions can only serve the greater good of mankind. The fact that they might be corrupt? Discount that real quick.
Fourth, you need to believe that the world would be a better place without the police. Police just get into the middle of everything and make it all worse.
Fifth, the answer to all problems always goes back to more government.
Sixth, you believe in open discussions as long as everyone talks about your subject, in the correct way, and agrees. If they can't agree with you.....you need to end the discussion.
Seventh, you compare everyone you meet on some Hitler-scale, and disagreeable folks generally rate near a '8' on this scale.
Eighth, generally.....you are always pro-marijuana. You'd like to see it legalized, but not taxed.
Ninth, you generally enjoy periods of unemployment....the longer, the more entertaining it can be.
Tenth, you like the color black when picking clothing for public appearances.
Eleventh, you enjoy showing just a hint of violent character....up until the point where you end up at some protest with ex-Marines.
Twelfth, you always cite that such-and-such European country is real socialist, and then always get shocked when you see a fair amount of wealth existing in that country. You always get a bit embarrassed when admitting that you've never been to Europe, and the most socialist place you've ever been was San Francisco. Course, then you admit you were awful doped up when walking around San Francisco, and you might have just dreamed a bunch of stuff up.
Thirteenth, you live in constant fear of turning right-wing. It's bad enough that you often visit a mental health guy and talk over this stress in your life. All he can suggest is to smoke more marijuana, and keep capitalist people out of your life. Your doctor even hints that he might be capitalist because he drives a BMW. You attend meetings in your early 30's to talk over your feelings and learn that other socialists are suffering the same stress.
Fourteenth, you keep citing that western democracy has failed, but you never seem to talk about the Greeks, Plato, Aristotle, or that nutcase Socrates. You generally admit that you never studied philosophy, or sat in a true history class.
Fifteenth, your day is consumed thinking of a large number of folks as being 'lesser' in terms of comparison to you. It starts out with coffee, and then continues on through the morning. By noon, you have to do a double-joint to continue your line of thinking. You always see happy people as a threat, because they just aren't wise enough to see the terrible world up close and personal.
Finally, you get to some peak and collapse....when dad or mom cut off the $500 a month that they've been sending you to support your 'life-under-the-bridge' routine. Then you have to resort to capitalism, and deliver pizzas.
Tuesday, 3 July 2018
Ten Things I Would Abolish
1. The IRS. Frankly, it ought to be a one-page form, and everyone who makes any money in the top 90-percent of society ought to be paying something....just a straight percentage.
2. NCAA Bowl Committee. Look, it's all political and you could just appoint six barbers from Houston to be the real selection committee.
3. The Senate. Frankly, they've developed into mostly entertainment creations, and can't really deliver on anything.
4. The FCC. Maybe in the 1930s to the 1960s.....they made sense. Today, it's just a political machine.
5. The 9th Court on the West Coast. I'd like to split the court up into three....giving Alaska and Hawaii their own court.
6. CNN. Before 2017, they were marginally able to do news themes....today? It's the anti-Trump network.
7. NATO. When the Cold War ended in 1990.....someone should have written up a declaration that NATO would dissolve within ten to fifteen years. Today? It's just a waste of money.
8. NCAA Basketball. Let's just make up a junior league for the NBA, and pay the players some salary.
9. Facebook. If they were open and honest, I'd probably be pro-Facebook.
10. The Conner Show (replacing Roseanne). It's just a waste of time, and all it'll deliver is some fake laughs to the smaller crowd that remains.
ICE? Well....you could abolish them....but the laws are still on the books....who would enforce them? Notice how they didn't say they'd abolish the laws?
2. NCAA Bowl Committee. Look, it's all political and you could just appoint six barbers from Houston to be the real selection committee.
3. The Senate. Frankly, they've developed into mostly entertainment creations, and can't really deliver on anything.
4. The FCC. Maybe in the 1930s to the 1960s.....they made sense. Today, it's just a political machine.
5. The 9th Court on the West Coast. I'd like to split the court up into three....giving Alaska and Hawaii their own court.
6. CNN. Before 2017, they were marginally able to do news themes....today? It's the anti-Trump network.
7. NATO. When the Cold War ended in 1990.....someone should have written up a declaration that NATO would dissolve within ten to fifteen years. Today? It's just a waste of money.
8. NCAA Basketball. Let's just make up a junior league for the NBA, and pay the players some salary.
9. Facebook. If they were open and honest, I'd probably be pro-Facebook.
10. The Conner Show (replacing Roseanne). It's just a waste of time, and all it'll deliver is some fake laughs to the smaller crowd that remains.
ICE? Well....you could abolish them....but the laws are still on the books....who would enforce them? Notice how they didn't say they'd abolish the laws?
Dear Mr Dershowitz
My brother referenced a piece written over about Alan Dershowitz (the famed lefty-lawyer) who was now in some minor ways defending Trump, and found himself 'shunned' over in Martha's Vineyard by the anti-Trump crowd which gathers there each summer to heal themselves, find relief from the heat, and chat over the good years of President Obama. Dershowitz says it's impossible for him to find any connectivity or hosts to greet him in the Vineyard area.
So I sat and pondered upon it. Naturally, I came to the Bama conclusion:
Dear Mr Dershowitz:
Normally, we folks in Alabama don't go around and inviting celebrities, stars, or VIPs down to our neck of the woods, for varying reasons (mostly because we think they'd drink up most of the whiskey or take off with our damsels).
But in your case, we'd like to extend a welcome.
The truth is, we kinda admire guys who do stuff like what you did, and stepped way out on the 'plank'. It takes a bit of courage, and crazy-style to go and defend President Trump like you did.
We want to say up front....we just aren't like those Martha's Vineyard crowd folks. We kinda bask in the summer heat, and tend to socialize on the porch. We do sip a good bit of ice tea and lemonade, and if you ask for the stout stuff....folks will quietly bring it out and freshen your drink a bit (extra is not a problem with us, but just don't say nothing about this to the Baptists).
For excitement in the summer, we tend to have five basic experiences: (1) fishing, (2) Baptist revivals, (3) fence painting, (4) NASCAR racing, and (5) softball. I realize these might not fit into your style, but we also tend to get into wild stories on the porch about so-and-so parson who got arrested, or some gossip over the neighbor blowing up his garage by accident, or laying out how such-and-such governor had some mistress that he was paying $400,000 a year on salary. These stories are usually worth sitting on the porch, and hearing in detail.
Occasionally, you might be in a highly cultured group, which chats about the 31 chapters of Proverbs from the Old Testament, or a wild personalized interpretation version of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, or some personalized WW II story from Uncle Lonny which seems to be half-true-half-false but we never care about the changing landscape or that he fought both the Germans and Japanese at the same time.
I won't go and say we got it better than those folks in Martha's Vineyard....but we don't hold a grudge against a guy like you. And we kinda think that you deserve better treatment.
So, if you are tired of the Vineyard fake nature.....come on down to Alabama, and give us a chance. We're save you a rocker on the porch, and keep up a tub of crushed ice for your drinks.
So I sat and pondered upon it. Naturally, I came to the Bama conclusion:
Dear Mr Dershowitz:
Normally, we folks in Alabama don't go around and inviting celebrities, stars, or VIPs down to our neck of the woods, for varying reasons (mostly because we think they'd drink up most of the whiskey or take off with our damsels).
But in your case, we'd like to extend a welcome.
The truth is, we kinda admire guys who do stuff like what you did, and stepped way out on the 'plank'. It takes a bit of courage, and crazy-style to go and defend President Trump like you did.
We want to say up front....we just aren't like those Martha's Vineyard crowd folks. We kinda bask in the summer heat, and tend to socialize on the porch. We do sip a good bit of ice tea and lemonade, and if you ask for the stout stuff....folks will quietly bring it out and freshen your drink a bit (extra is not a problem with us, but just don't say nothing about this to the Baptists).
For excitement in the summer, we tend to have five basic experiences: (1) fishing, (2) Baptist revivals, (3) fence painting, (4) NASCAR racing, and (5) softball. I realize these might not fit into your style, but we also tend to get into wild stories on the porch about so-and-so parson who got arrested, or some gossip over the neighbor blowing up his garage by accident, or laying out how such-and-such governor had some mistress that he was paying $400,000 a year on salary. These stories are usually worth sitting on the porch, and hearing in detail.
Occasionally, you might be in a highly cultured group, which chats about the 31 chapters of Proverbs from the Old Testament, or a wild personalized interpretation version of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, or some personalized WW II story from Uncle Lonny which seems to be half-true-half-false but we never care about the changing landscape or that he fought both the Germans and Japanese at the same time.
I won't go and say we got it better than those folks in Martha's Vineyard....but we don't hold a grudge against a guy like you. And we kinda think that you deserve better treatment.
So, if you are tired of the Vineyard fake nature.....come on down to Alabama, and give us a chance. We're save you a rocker on the porch, and keep up a tub of crushed ice for your drinks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)