Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

News Briefs 26-05-2006

Are we safe yet?

Quote of the Day:

…the changes that George W. Bush has made to our nation’s constitutional firmament may not depart with the first family’s bags. His disregard for the separation of powers has so dramatically distorted the office of the president that he may have engineered a turning point in American history.
Bush has taught tomorrow’s leaders that, if there are no consequences for ignoring legal constraints on power and if no one stops you from conducting the nation’s business in secret, you don’t have to be accountable.
Being answerable to another is humbling. It makes you more careful in your actions. It requires that you consider how you will defend your decisions. George Bush has freed himself of this constitutional imperative and is showing the next president, and the next, how it is done.

Excerpts from Robyn E. Blumner’s recent editorial.

  1. Excerpts from Robyn E. Blumner
    Gee, I can’t imagine a better place than TDG to highlight that load of fanciful fiction, paranoid lunacy and laughable tripe. The Left has just lost their freakin’ minds.

    Carry on…..

    1. It’s always been that way
      It’s always been that way here. Esepcially with certain submitters. You just have to learn to ignore it along with the hyper-left links that go along with it.

      Man I miss bill…..

      1. Re: It’s always been that way
        [quote=thrustbucket]It’s always been that way here. Esepcially with certain submitters. You just have to learn to ignore it along with the hyper-left links that go along with it.

        Man I miss bill…..[/quote]

        Amen brutha.

      2. I can’t wait for the day
        when you two little neocon worshippers will wake up and see what your president and his cohorts have done to your country.
        In the meantime boys, carry on and enjoy what you can, while you can.
        Your leaders have taken you for a journey down a very dark road where you will not see your destination, nor be able to survive it if and when you arrive.
        I feel so sorry for the decent people of America who are trying to fight this sorry sick mess of a government from within,while all the time having to struggle against the egos of the Bush followers who swagger and flourish their guns against the rest of the normal thinking world.
        Soon you will see how you and yours will pay and pay for generations into the future for failing to recognise and deal with this moronic and deadly group when you could.
        I wish you well.

        shadows

        1. sigh
          Shadow, once again, you

          sigh
          Shadow, once again, you just don’t get it.
          I don’t support this president. I am not a neocon. I do not support Republicats or Democuns. Don’t you see it’s all the same? Why do you people in the “Normal World” insist on such a narrow view? Why can’t you see the big picture? Why can’t you see that you’re the victims of the biggest misdirection in human history when you spout nonsense like that?

          What is happening to America is far beyond the narrow left-wing diagnoses of “conservatism run amuck” or the Republican party, or Bush’s agenda, or the “Religious Fascist Right”. What is wrong with this country supercedes all of that…. by a huge margin.

          Who we have had for president has had very little to do with the problems and directions you mention, for about 30 years. Presidents are puppets. And have been most of the last century. Why do you people in the “Normal World” love to be apart of the puppet show, rather than look for those running it?

          You can continue to view American politics with narrow spoon-fed vision, seeing the outward actions the way they want you to, and blaming exactly who they want you to. Just know your playing right into their agenda by doing so.

          I love how it’s so convienient for you people of the “Normal World” to pin everything you dislike about America on Bush, conservatism, or anything even remotely related. It makes me laugh nervously to watch you people in your so-called “Normal World” playing right along with the true perpetrators symphony, in the right section, and in perfect tune.

          1. thrustbucket……
            you are absolutly correct! I agree with all you said 100%. The problem is the puppeteer’s will never be exsposed. And it’s not just the USA, although the USA is a star player.
            People don’t want to think that there is a greater power that is controlling world economics and politics. This would make them give up hope. A world with no hope is a doomed world.

            I have rarely, if never, commented on the politicle debate that pops up here on TDG, but I have said in the past “the best place to hide a tree is in the forest”.

          1. Not a personal attack, mate
            just an attempt to make known the frustration I feel about the appalling criminal behaviour of your government.
            No I am not in favour of a Democratic government either as I am not in favour of one in Oz.
            I am an equal rights Liberal.
            I view all political parties with the same degree of antipathy.
            But your particular government this time,the same as our particular government this time, have really stuffed things up.

            Do I think the Dems would clean it up if they got in?
            Hell no.
            That’s the sad part.
            There ain’t no goodies in this western, they’re all baddies.

            What we need is a fresh perspective on politics.People who want to be politicians for truly altruistic reasons.
            And they could prove this by not accepting salaries.

            Brisbane once had a Lord Mayor who had already made his money before he came to power and he would not accept a salary.
            He was in power for 25 years and did the best that anyone ever did, before or since.

            Because I discriminate against Bush does not automatically make me a Dem.
            What it means is that I can recognise loonies when I see them.

            shadows

          2. We Almost Totally Agree! And Maybe,…
            Shadows

            You mean about the same thing! I take my hat off to the former Lord Mayor of Brisbane; but, I feel that he was a very rare exception.

            In my opinion, we don’t need professional politicians. We need need term limits that don’t allow for consecutive terms, rigid accountability that doesn’t allow for immunity from prosecution, a system that allows people from all income brackets to serve in government, and a salary structure that doesn’t allow a politician to earn more than the average income of the people. Furthermore, to the greatest extent possible, we need to eliminate all political advantages that a person serving in government can attain, and we need higher minimum ages for entering public life, at least 30 or 35. Since I’m suggesting a system that would allow persons from all income brackets to serve in government, I think that accepting a salary would be necessary for many in order to take care of their families! So, I can’t agree with the idea that all political leaders should work without pay; because, we don’t want the rich running things.

            What do you think?

            kennc

          3. In lieu of my suggestion, kennc
            I love your idea.
            Yes, if we only could do that.
            This is where leadership of society has always failed the society it serves.
            I cannot see it happening though.
            I read somewhere once that the smell of ministerial leather (that is, a government minister) is a powerful aphrodisiac.
            You are an excellent thinker kennc, and I wish someone like you could kickstart a new program for leadership in the world.

            shadows

          4. Power Is Possibly The Most Addictive Drug!
            Shadows

            Mine was just an idea; but, power must be returned to the people! If power isn’t returned to the people promptly and in an orderly manner, the people will take it back and that isn’t a pretty senerio; because, new and equally or even more destructive power structures will probably be created in this scenerio by other power hungry leaders. So, it is very necessary for the present powers that be to return Power To The People before things get totally out of hand!

            What do you think?

            kennc

          5. salaries and bribes
            If you don’t pay the people in control (i.e. the bureaucrats and politicians), or you pay them very little, then they are even more easily tempted by bribes than they are already.

            Most of the people who run for public office are not in it for the money. They are in it for the control.

            That’s why I think that salary structure has little to do with it. Unless you seriously underpay them – then you are inviting corruption.

          6. I Agree That It’s About Control; but,…
            earthling

            They need to know how the average family has to live and that is my point about salary. Furthermore, if there is strict oversight, no immunity, no get out of jail free card, and total disclosure that is enforced, they are going to very careful and many, if not all, of the crooks are going to find something else to do in my opinion!

            What do you think?

            kennc

          7. oversight, disclosure
            I agree about those aspects of no immunity, and enforcement and that kind of aspect.

            Also along those lines, even though that is not precisely your argument here, I favour full disclosure of contributions. Full disclosure of donations for elections, and during the terms of office. And this has to be in large print, so to speak.

            So someone running for office, or in office, can take any donations they want, but it has to be made public immediately. And it has to be easily accesible to the public.

            One big problem of course is the enforcement, and who has oversight over the enforcers.

            The salary part I don’t agree with completely, for a reason: your average family with limited resources has a very short term view of things. A short term view often leads to bad long term strategies. I do agree of course with having to understand the effects of long term strategies on the average family. And also on the average single person. Who says that only families are important?

            Your points are all valid. Perhaps you assume more idealism than I think you will find.

            But let me suggest a somewhat different angle for some of the jobs in goverment: for a lot of the tasks, we should be hiring professionals, rather then electing amateurs. Sure, oversight has to be from elected officials, in cooperation with legal professionals. But the technical tasks should be done by technical professionals.

            Remember Red Adair, who put out more oil fires than anyone else? He said, if you think paying professionals is expensive, try hiring amateurs.

            And no, I am not a monarchist 🙂

          8. No Political Contributions To Candidates Or Political Parties!
            earthling

            All political contributions will be made to a private organization to be held in trust until election time! At election time, the money will be distributed equally to all candidates. Nobody will owe anybody any favors. Considering that consecutive terms will not be allowed, they will need a job when they leave office. This will incourage long term views; because, with no immunities, they will pay dearly for their mistakes. Since they will not be allowed to seek a job while they are in office, they will be allowed to receive 75% of their salary for up to one year after they leave office if they report regularly to an employment center, go on a specific quota of interviews each week, and agree to accept any job for which they are qualified that pays atleast 60% of their government salary. Upon acceptance of a job or the expiration of a year, their government compension ends. Furthermore, By full disclosure, I mean full and complete disclosure that includes audits! Finally, oversight should be done by private non-profit organizations whose oversight committies are made-up of qualified voluntees that are chosen at random on a rotating basis from all walks of life. No one would serve on an oversight committee for more than two years and no one would be allowed to serve on the same committee twice or serve on any committee if they had served on a committee in the previous three years!

            What do you think?

            kennc

          9. disclosure and distrubution
            Well ok, most of that is reasonable and would be beneficial. There are however 2 specific problems:

            – if you distribute all contributions evenly, then the Nazi party (and other equally tasteful candidates) will get significant money from supporters of more reasonable people. This is not a good idea.

            – a term limit of 1 single term (4 years, 6 years or so) will not lead to long term views, since there are projects that cannot even be started in a single term.

            What I meant by full disclosure, and I think it is an important point, it that the contributors have to be publically known well before the election. So that the voters can be aware of who is paying for what.

            A more general problem, not closely related to your proposals, is that close government oversight of a lot of details will only work if the government is trustworthy in the first place. Hence your suggestion for the non-profit organizations. But who decides which volunteers are qualified? Who checks if they don’t make profits?

            If you choose them at random from the general population, most of them won’t be qualified to check correctness of contributions and disclosure. I’m sorry, but the average Jack and Jill from the street could be easily fooled by dishonest candidates. So if you then say, we will (for example) select randomly from members from the legal professions, you have just elevated another elite to control your country.

            I don’t think we will improve things significantly by making the process more complicated.

            Perhaps simpler rules: you can advertise as much as you want, but the disclosure of your contributors has to be bigger than your advertisement.

          10. Try to think outside the square, earthling
            You are saying the same old, same old.
            I was waiting for you to say that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.That’s what they say here.
            I think it is possible to leave that old structure behind, and move into a totally new area of government, as kennc advises.
            I know about people wanting control and I know about corruption, and that’s why this system does not work.
            Maybe one day some great man will come along and propose a system of leadership for the western world that involves older more mature and more sensible people taking positions in government in their retirement years.
            I have seen hoods get elected to State Government here.One who was a former member of the Nazi Party.He strutted around in his steel-capped boots and said what he would do to the aborigines if he had a chance.If this person ever matures he may be sorry for his youthful behaviour, but I don’t care about that.
            I care that he was elected to Parliament NOW.

            shadows

          11. innovative older people
            I find most older people to be set in their ways, and objective to change.

            Yet you encourage me to think more innovatively.

            And then you recomment to elect old people, so that this can be done.

            If your people in Australia elect bigoted idiots, that is a problem with your voters, don’t blame it on non-participants like me. Go talk to you local voters. I would never vote for a racist or bigot of any kind. You should vote against those people, and support other candidates in your elections. I myself have no influence in your country. Unless you want me to raise tons of money from foreign (non-Australian) sources, and buy votes there? I didn’t think so.

            There are plenty of “young” people with good ideas.

          12. Why…………..
            do you take every comment so personally earthling, and why are your responses so barbed.

            What I am advocating is a return to the tribal elder system, where if you become wise as you get older and prove that you have learned from your mistakes,and have compassion and imagination, you may take a seat on the board of tribal elders.
            In this position you give orders and advice to the bureaucrats, not the other way around as it is now.

            I have come across a lot of people who have never grown up, they have just grown old, with the same mindset they had when young.

            It’s easy to say that people should vote against bigots and such, but with many elections and wannabes, you don’t know their character until they are found with their snouts in the trough, or it is discovered they have affiliations with the Mafia.

            The political system we have in the Western world, which we have tried to force on the rest of the world, does not work.
            I can’t see any way it will work while there is opportunity to gain riches and power from representing the people.
            It should be an honour to do so, and be an honour bestowed on those who deserve it.
            People who have lived full lives and grown from them, who are not afraid to say they have been wrong,whose humility picks them out from the crowd,who are not acquisitive of riches nor power,who care for the community and the land are the people I would like to see directing the way our society should go.

            Do I want you to raise tons of money to buy votes?
            What a funny little sausage you are, earthling.

            shadows

          13. elders are at fault
            The tribal elder system gave us brutal small chiefs, then brutal little kings, the brutal emperors and zcars and dictators.

            All the tribal elder system resulted in was the must successful thugs gaining more and more power.

            Grow up, you are not too old.

            You start by asking me why I take your remarks personal, and you finish by insulting me. That is not new.

          14. You are talking about dictatorships
            in the past.
            I am talking about a different system in the future.
            There would be no kings and emperors, or chief or czars or dictators.
            Under a system of a senate of elders there would be no boss.

            I didn’t mean to insult you, that is something I say to people who say things I don’t understand.
            Now if I wanted to insult you,you can be sure you would know about it.
            I’m sorry you feel offended.

            shadows

          15. well ok
            It sometimes seems that you mean to insult people, and then say that you did not mean it. But I will take you word for it, so let’s not get overly excited.

            I know you are aiming for a different system for the future. Perhaps one that is more based on cooperation and reason, than on the use of control and power. That is a good objective, and has been tried before, although with mixed results.

            It is just that what many people are proposing (and your ideas sound like those that I have seen), are trying to go back to tribal societies. That seems like an idialistic assumption, that life was peaceful in the age of tribal societies. It was not, that is one problem.

            Another problem is that those tribal societies led to what we have today, with all the problems we have today.

            So, if we go to a more flat society, without large structures of authority, there are 2 problems:

            1 – how do we get there ? Somehow we would have to get rid of the UN, national governments, large companies, large cities, and all that stuff.
            2 – how do we stay there, without local bullies taking over more and more control ?

            Theoretical anarchists (not bomb-throwers, but those people who want to keep a society without big authority), have no answer for part 2. Anarchy may be nice while it lasts as they envision it. But it is not stable for any length of time.

            And a “system of a senate of elders” sounds like an aristocracy, or perhaps a technocracy. Or worse, just a senate of people who qualify just because they did not die young.

            If you somehow can establish a system of experienced, calm and reasonable experts, how do you keep it that way? They will develop personal interests quickly as long as you pick humans.

            But there is one point where I agree in principle – at some points in history, change is healthy, even a little revolution.

          16. humph
            >>It sometimes seems that you mean to insult people, and then say that you did not mean it.

            Pot calling the kettle black, earthling.

            Kat

          17. you should talk
            I am part Cuban, so don’t tell me about being black.

            You are just as biased as anyone Kat, in this respect.

          18. humbug
            If you can show me several comments where I’ve personally insulted another user – or posted (what shall I call it) ‘stealth-snark’, like you regularly do, I’ll eat the proverbial black-bird pie.

            I didn’t say I wasn’t biased. Everyone is, in one way or another. But unlike you, I don’t bait people with snarky comments, and then say, oh, that wasn’t what I meant.

            Kat

          19. explain please?
            what does it mean, “stealth-snark” ?

            I am not a native english or anglo-american person.

    2. Rightwing voices
      Blumner points out that some rightwing voices have been more vocal than the Democrats in Congress on this issue:

      I challenge anyone to read an important new report by the libertarian Cato Institute (www.cato.org) and not be chilled. “Power Surge: The Constitutional Record of George W. Bush” is an unblinking 28-page analysis of our slow devolution into autocracy. Its message can be summed up with this quote: “Under (the president’s) sweeping theory of executive power, the liberty of every American rests on nothing more than the grace of the White House.”

      You might want to consider the possibility that future Democratic Presidents could well be as keen as Bush has been to expand the Executive Branch’s power.

      Kat

      1. Re: Rightwing voices
        [quote=Kat]You might want to consider the possibility that future Democratic Presidents could well be as keen as Bush has been to expand the Executive Branch’s power.
        [/quote]

        Well, sure. Despite the memory lapses by the Left, past Democrat Presidents, from FDR to Clinton, had no problem what so ever in pushing the envelope of Executive powers. Be it rounding up people of a particular ethnicity and putting them in camps, to lieing to grand juries and impeding a federal investigation in order to protect an illicit affair in the workplace with a subordinate.

        1. Left and Right
          Then it would seem to me that it has nothing to do with Left vs Right but with pure and simple attacks on the democratic system of the US, regardless of Left-Right allegiances.

          It’s not like if ‘they’ do it, it’s wrong and if ‘we’ do it, well ‘we’ would never do that now, would ‘they’?

          It is really too bad that it would be so difficult looking at politics other than through polarized/partisan views.

          Each side should be in position to counter the evil within whenefer it shows it’s face, should they not?

          Government is a very likely place for ‘evil’ to show its ugly face and I do not believe I need explaining why. I would even say that no matter which side of the fence a government lies, it should always be looked at with suspicion, less one day something horrible happened and no one is allowed to lay the blame.

          Would you not agree?

          1. Yeah, I would agree.
            Yeah, I would agree. Government is the problem period. Getting caught up with blaming the left or the right side of the Aisle is very much like trying to decide which position you want to be screwed in.

            I just get so tired of the black and white thinkers, that so easily blame those at the forefront, while darker and more evil forces are at work under the skin of the entire mechanism.

            The American government is in a downward spiral. Switching control from party to party simply changes the direction of the spiral.

      2. turf wars
        Well, duh.

        Everyone in government thinks that they could do their job better if they were not slowed down by all the other branches of government.

        Presidents, prime ministers, parliaments, judges, and all the “little people” below them.

        The very purpose of the separation of power is to slow down all these ambitious people. Central control is exactly what we don’t want. In any country.

        1. I want to share with you all
          I want to share with you all a cool link I found. I don’t know if this has ever been posted on TDG, but it should be. It’s a very facinating read to help develop the overall picture of why America is on the course it is on, and maybe even a glimpse of who is behind it.

          Find it here: http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/iron_mountain_full.htm

          I would really like it if some of you at least skimmed it, if you don’t have time to read it (it’s not short), and we had a discussion on it. (I’m especially interested in what Kat, Shadow, Rico and Greg think about it)

          1. I wanna share too
            As soon as I’ve had a few more pots of coffee, I’ll struggle through your book-length recommendation. But in the mean time, I’d like some of you to read ‘The Feds in my head‘ because, for one thing, it’s funny. And not. I intended it as a bit of comic relief – and not. I suspect the author intended it to work on many levels as well.

            Kat

          2. that was good Kat..
            maybe a little too close to the truth……….as for thrustbuckets link…I have been going to that site for many years now..a wealth of info.

          3. Nice link
            That’s a great read (though it is a satirical hoax, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Report_From_Iron_Mountain). Though it is a hoax, the amazing thing is to read about the way the government reacted to it…many seem not to have been taken aback by the content, but just that a confidential report was leaked. Which suggests…
            😉

            I would also defend our right to lampoon the idiot king of the United States. He may not be the power behind the throne, and I’m not at all of the belief that the Democrats hold the answer, but at least if we ridicule the situation enough people might wake from their slumber and wonder what the hell is going on…to have a guy who is not fit to run a local business (supposedly) in charge of the most powerful country in the world amuses (and frightens) me every day.

            I have gone on record in the past as pointing out that the previous election, in which both candidates were Bonesmen, fits their Hegelian philosophy of controlling supposedly opposing sides perfectly. I’m surprised nobody has commented further on that.

            Thanks for the link Thrustbucket.

            Peace and Respect
            Greg
            ——————————————-
            You monkeys only think you’re running things

          4. Lampooning and business
            Hi Greg,

            During the lampooning could we have something clever or amusing rather than personal attacks?

            BTW, GWB invested a little over $600,000 for a 1.8% share in the Texas Rangers baseball team and sold it for $14-million before he became president. That’s sucessful business in my book.

            Bill

          5. What a crook!
            The story “How Dubya made his millions” is scary.The sooner the US gets rid of this weasel the better.
            What a shame this has happened to a country like the US with so much to give.

            shadows

          6. Baseball money
            Hi Kat,

            So you found it on the Internet so it must be true, right? Don’t read anything on the Internet about Reptialians Kat.

            As the Governor of Texas, GWB and the Ranger-deal was investigated by the SEC and found to be above-board and legal. The Arlington Stadium was approved by the voters. If you have some proof otherwise take it up with the SEC.

            Bill

          7. Pointless, but…
            I think it’s unlikely that you’ll find anything of value in this, but a growing majority of us are relieved to know that some people are finally coming to their senses:
            Confessions of a repentant Republican.

            Not to mention, it’s nice to find a writer who so skillfully incorporates his sources.

            Sorry, Bill, but I’ve got more important things to do (like give my dear old cat his daily enema) than to bang my head against a wall by trying to explain why technically legal doesn’t equal ethical.

            >>Don’t read anything on the Internet about Reptialians Kat.

            Is this your Freudian slip showing? 😉

            Kat

          8. Cat emema
            Hi Kat,

            Gee, that’s too bad Kat. . I was really looking forward to how buying and selling a baseball team is unethical. Although you made a general accusation toward GWB, I thought you might duck out of this thread when it came to specifics because there really aren’t any.

            But I can see that tending to your cat’s gut takes a higher priority than backing-up what you say. :o( But how long can it take? Cats don’t really have very long or complicated intestines. Fifteen minutes – tops. Since you say it’s a daily activity it should take less. Maybe something will come to you during the process. Are you sure it’s not envy?

            >>Don’t read anything on the Internet about Reptialians Kat.
            Is this your Freudian slip showing? 😉

            I was using an example that everything one might read on the Internet might not be true. I have no idea what “your Freudian slip showing” means unless you’ve been reading David Icke’s website. Are you indicating you believe that either GWB or I or both of us are Reptialians? :o( I hope it’s too late for you on this one as well. Or is this an example of amusing or clever lampooning?

            Bill

          9. none of what either has said is clever or amusing
            >>I was really looking forward to how buying and selling a baseball team is unethical.

            Then you should actually read the article I linked to on How Dubya made his millions.

            >>[Re: Reptialians (sic)] I was using an example that everything one might read on the Internet might not be true.

            I always keep in mind that things posted on the web may not be true. But the more immediate challenge you and I face in any discussion of politics, is that we have very different values. As far as I’m concerned, that means practically anything we might say to each other on the subject is a waste of time. Or to put it another way, I’d rather be giving the cat an enema.

            Kat

          10. Cat Enema
            Hi Kat,

            I did read the site that you linked. None of it was new to me. Arlington is very close to me. Your site is a socialist website so things, like profit, that you find shocking are actually normal in a capitalist society. The United States is a capitalist nation.

            Did you read the site? Did you understand that Ann Richards, the governor that approved the city’s land grab, is a Democrat. She wasn’t doing GWB any favors. In fact, GWB beat her to be elected governor. They’re not exactly good friends. The article makes it sound like this was GWB’s idea or it was done to please him. Although he did benefit, nothing could be further from the truth. Do you understand that the city of Arlington, Texas voted to build the stadium by a two-to-one margin. Do you think Tom Hicks bought the franchise as a favor to GWB and the rest of the shareholders? Hicks bought the team to make money. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that. In fact, that’s the purpose of a business in a capitalist society. That’s why I go to work every day; how about you.

            Did I mention that GWB has an MBA from the Harvard School of Business? That’s a very good background for a capitalist.

            Am I to understand that you only want people that agree with your politics to post responses to your political posts? That would make life easier, wouldn’t it.

            Bill

          11. Re: Lampooning and business
            [quote=Bill]Hi Greg,
            During the lampooning could we have something clever or amusing rather than personal attacks? [/quote]

            No, lampooning works best when it’s personal. I’m sure businessman Dubya has enough millions to console him when he’s sad about me having a go at him.

            [quote]BTW, GWB invested a little over $600,000 for a 1.8% share in the Texas Rangers baseball team and sold it for $14-million before he became president. That’s sucessful business in my book.[/quote]

            Do we really want to go through this Bill? Shall we unearth all the keen ‘investors’ approaching Dubya whilst his daddy was in office, and whether they still have connections today? Shall we go into how well his oil businesses did (but you’re right, Dubya surely turned a profit as they went belly up, so I guess he’s a good businessman). Or the ‘upgrade’ on the baseball investment because of his skills?

            Sorry Bill, you’re an intelligent man but your president is a bigoted and unintelligent braggard and dolt. I’ve been saying it for years, but it seems that everyone else seems to be realising it finally.

            Kind regards,
            Greg

          12. GWB oil and baseball
            Hi Greg,

            I wasn’t speaking of GWB when referencing personal attacks. I was referencing attacking the posters Thrustbucket and Anomymous when attacked in this thread. Attacking GWB is fine, but personally attacking a poster for having a different opinion really doesn’t accomplish much, IMO. It doesn’t speak well for the attacker to call people names (“two little neocon worshippers”.) Attact the idea, not the poster. I believe we should be civil to one another although we might not agree on everything. Do you disagree?

            Oil people live in a finincial universe that you and I do not enjoy. GWB’s oil business was floated by investors looking for write-offs, but investors didn’t make the baseball owners wealthy. The city of Arlington, Texas did when they voted to build them a new stadium, 2 to 1. Right place, right time. You might hate GWB for many things, but you display a lack of judgement when you refer to him as untelligent. GWB holds a BS in history from Yale and an MBA from the Harvard Business school. The Harvard Business school invented modern business and holds the highest standards on earth. They also teach some of them how to make $14-million from an investment in a sports franchise. I wish I knew how to do that; how about you? Unintelligent people don’t become multimillionars, get MBAs from Harvard, and get elected twice as President.

            Bill

          13. Attacking the content…
            …and not the form reminds us that the subject is on the table and that is where it should remain.

            Could I also suggest that beyond that, for the subject to really be on the table, the speaker must already have a remote stance for it.

            I would agree, if that is what you mean, that the subject should already be separated from the people observing it so that it remains what it is and not what we want it to be based on personal conditioning.

            Not easy to do but at least necessary to be somewhat aware of the principle.

            So now, just for laugh, GWB hols a BS in history?

            Sorry, just taught it sounded funny.

            (Please factor in the fact that English is not my mother tongue and you might laugh.)

          14. Attacking the poster
            Hi Richard,

            You and I have disagreed often (GM crops comes to mind), but we haver never called each other names. I think we should serve as a model.

            BS is Bachelor of Science. But I may have made an error. It might be Bachelor of Arts.

            Bill

          15. Some other thing I should have mentioned
            Hi again Bill,

            Just wanted to add a comment on the assumption that GWB is intelligent because he got degrees.

            That very much depends on how you define intelligence.

            In my book, anyway, university does not make you intelligent. One may have all the degrees he can show, following hard work and effective memorization (repeating what he learned so to speak) and remain quite the idiot. If it was not the case, the scholarly consensus, whether in science or otherwise, would be quite more impressive than it currently or has ever been for that matter.

            Having a degree is more often than other the seed of pride and pride is the end of intelligence since it gives that man the impression of detaining knowledge. Knowledge in such a case quickly becomes a rock, something that cannot evolve and, together with the form that knowledge has become, does the mind of the BS holder become trapped in the form of his reason.

            See my point?

          16. Intelligence
            Hi Richard,

            I agree that a degree from a university is not an automatic indicator of intelligence. But I don’t agree that it is a mind-trap if that’s what you’re saying.

            Harvard is the finest business school on the planet. Combine that with the ability to turn enormous profit and being elected twice as president does indicate intelligence.

            Bill

          17. Not a mind trap
            Hi Bill,

            No, I did not mean that university in itself was a mind trap.

            One may be, or not, intelligent (and whatever range may lie in between) and go to university.

            That will not make that person more or less intelligent. If one puts so much value in the degree, ‘he’ already suffers a mind trap because he is conditioned already to believe that ‘he’ has ‘achieved’.

            The quality of intelligence will alter the way materials are perceived and the kind of interpretation.

            The mind who values the degree to a point where it is the only point of reference is not likely to have a free mind in face of the materials presented to him during his studies. He will not question and will take it all for granted. Like so many people who believe that a computer cannot make mistakes.

            Conditioning of course is a mind-trap and, university can be a vector to support cultural and social mind encapsulating. So, the mind trap is not the university itself but rather the conditioning that we may lead us to believe that what is taught in universities is necessarily correct both in approach and conclusions.

            Any school brings forward a way of seeing that is based on the history of the society that created it. In that sense, it becomes an enforcing vector for certain values that are fundamental to the maintenance of a way of thinking in the populations.

            Of course, most people would not challenge the worth of universally accepted wisdom brought forth through our schooling systems from base to top. Enforcing a way of thinking, as is done in schools, is an attack on the freedom of mind but is of course a necessary tool a civilization uses for its own sake.

            About GWB’s intelligence, it is all a question of semantics as it depends on how you define intelligence. Some will associate talent with intelligence for instance but is it that really? Is luck intelligence? Is having a rich familial background anyhow related to intelligence?

            All this in itself is of course no proof of absence of intelligence and I realize that.

            I would suggest though that a real intelligence is one that is conscious of the consequences of actions or inactions and not just some well oiled capacity to analyze, compare and reorganize data elegantly, namely one’s own experience, as we are thought in school. Critical thinking is a form of intelligence but it always looks backward, often failing to see forward even with all the good will it can muster.

          18. Harvard, MBA, and science
            There are many things to be learned in good universities, from many sources. An exaggerated opinion of oneself is one of things people can learn there.

            An Master of Business Administration is a highly qualified bookeeper. Perhaps the best MBAs have vision for the business they administer.

            There are on the other hand parts of the university education that teach people independent thinking. At least in some sciences.

            When there are new ideas, they need to be examined, and evaluated. Sure, often they are rejected just because they are new. But they should also not be accepted just because they are new.

            What can we use to examine and evaluate new ideas, if not our present and past knowledge?

            PS: [edited later by myself]

            Of course Richard is correct, a big university degree does not mean that the person is highly intelligent, nor does it mean that the person is particularly stupid. It does however mean that the person had patience, or resources, or both. You can’t do it without patience AND without resources.

            To add a small but important point: there are many students with MSc and PhD degrees who graduate, and do not agree with their teachers taught them. Particularly at the doctoral level, that is they whole point. Which I don’t think is very relevant for MBAs.

          19. I Basically Agree!
            earthling

            Many MBA’S are highly qualified bookkeepers and accounting is a strong part of any MBA course. Many MBA’s have strong backgrounds in other areas and specialized in Management and Marketing. These MBA’s can do accounting; but, they don’t appreciate being called Bookkeepers!

            What do you think?

            kennc

          20. many talents
            I know that many MBAs have other backgrounds, and sometimes other degrees. They are highly respected people, for good reason.

            For example, if someone is an expert cook, and has an MBA to boot, this person can run excellent restaurants.

            If someone has an MBA and also knowledge an engineering degree in aerospace, they can start or manage an aicraft business.

            There are many more examples.

            I was just saying that having only an MBA does not qualify people for anything in particular. If MBAs are insulted by that, I am sorry.

            As to Management and Marketing – those take expertise, yes. But I was talking more about sciences, and independent thought, in response to Richard’s comments. So that is a different topic I think. I would not call Management or Marketing a “science”. More like an art. To be polite 🙂

          21. I Wouldn’t Call Management And Marketing A Science Or An Art!
            earthling

            Management and Marketing is about 80% psychology which is neither a science nor an art. It is, at best, a craft! But, for the record, MBA’s are from Behavioral Sciences Departments, not Liberal Arts Departments, and the term ‘Art’ is not used and/or appreciated by most. I was merely objecting to the implication that all MBA’s are ‘Bookkeepers’!:) I agree, however, that a Degree doesn’t, by itself, qualify anybody for anything; but, it doesn’t disqualify anybody either!

            What do you think?

  2. big brother on farms…..
    I find it amusing when I find not one mention of Australia in a story like this…..from the 29th of June,2005, all Australian animals on farms had to be electonicly tagged. If not tagged then you can’t move them from your property. We tagged all our stud herd last July, 350 beasts. Now we can trace all animals that have been sold just by logging onto the internet through a program called “herd master”.

    1. That’s interesting, floppy
      I didn’t know that, although I know technology is being put in place to trace all meat.

      Can you tell me if you use antibiotics on your herd?
      When I lived in the country every farmer kept a big box iof ready made-up syringes with antibiotics.
      If a cow looked a little down for whatever reason, they “needled” it.
      I know too that on many farms they feed them antibiotics to enhance growth.

      shadows

      1. yes shadows
        I do….but I try not to. understanding the animal is one thing…knowing how it feels is another. I spend much time just sitting amongst the mob and understanding their language. To me they are not just a cow…..each have their own unique attitudes. Their pecking order is a true democratic achievment. I wish kennc could observe how they manage this….it is what he was talking about with earthling in another post. The vet I use is an amazing bloke….he try’s to do the best he can naturally. He also shares with me all his knowledge and exsperience. We do not use any antibiotics to help or inhance our animals apparence or statue.
        2 days ago I had to turn and pull a dead calf from a cow….i’m sitting here thinking as I write this reply….In any day I do about 10 different jobs and more.When I needle a cow it is not just a quick jab like us….they need more because of size. An average dose is 60cc so this is given by 3 needles in different positions at 20cc each. Considering our average dose is 8cc then you can imagine what I mean. Also cows can’t talk so you need to be very vigerlant to diagnose their complaint,
        But this digital ID will only work if there is honesty among all…………..and we know this will never be the case…..the information is only as good as the original input……hence the honesty,…….

  3. Can anyone help me please
    When the comments on something get so long that they go to a new page, my computer does not show any new posts.
    It takes me minutes to scroll down and….nothing.
    I mean, I have a washer and dryer so I can have instant clean clothes, a microwave oven so I can have instant dinner, and the internet so I can have instant communication.
    But I have got to the stage where I won’t bother reading any new posts if they go over about 40.
    That’s why I asked before to start a new thread.

    And don’t tell me I’m lazy.I know that, it’s old news.Tell me something I don’t know.

    Thank you.

    shadows

    1. shadows’ computer not showing new posts
      Sounds like you’ve got a software glitch. You might try this… After you click on the 2nd page and find there’s nothing there, click on your reload button – up near the window where you type in website addresses.

      Kat

        1. makes sense?
          >>That makes sense.

          Yeah, but does it work? I know it works for me – occasionally – but that doesn’t mean it will also work for you. Running defrag also helps – sometimes.

          Kat

          1. Of course it makes sense
            And it works.At least so far it has, since you told me.I was reduced to counting the posts to see if I was going nuts.
            The defrag is set to go off now and then so should be OK.
            You are aware of course that my computer skills are not as good as your cat enema skills.

            shadows

  4. Just a comment
    I don’t want to get into a political debate with anyone, and I have no way of knowing if GWB came by his degrees the hard way by actually attenting university. However, I would like to point out that quite often ‘honorary’ degrees are awarded by universities to prominent people who have never so much as set foot on any university campus. Perhaps that’s a thought to bear in mind when considering someone’s supposed qualifications.

    Regards, Kathrinn.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal