Things You Can't Know, and for other purposes

((((whenever they introduce legislation, they cryptically describe what the bill is supposed to do, then add the phrase, "and for other purposes". I'm for abolishing that practice. It has nothing much to do with this post))))
=================================================================

Quite often you will hear governmental agencies, police, charities, the friggin Ad Council announce that some practice or restriction has saved X number of lives. In reality, there is no way of knowing how many lives their pet projects saved.

The reason it can't be known was quite eloquently illustrated in Mark Twain's short story, The Mysterious Stranger.

For example, they may claim that a general road block to filter out drunk drivers saves lives, and it may seem like it does. Usually it is more successful at nabbing people with too many parking tickets, past due license renewal or broken tail lights.

What if, because of that simple delay, Sally did not meet Biff at the local art gallery, and therefore the chance that they would produce a child named Dexter was lost?

Dexter would have been conceived at just the right time and temperature for all the genes and juices to create a benevolent super genius. Dexter would have raced through his education, obtaining a doctorate by age 13, and by age 20 he would have found they key to curing AIDS, as well as the common cold, cancers of all sorts, and psoriasis.



But no! Officer Dimwitty of the El Cajon branch of the CA Highway Patrol, and his sidekick Officer Juan Mamaculo, had to put up a roadblock, delaying some drivers more than others. They spent just enough extra time trying to look down Sally's blouse, asking stupid questions, that by the time she arrived at the gallery, Biff had hit the road. Fate had been duped by the Man.

So, in reality many lives which would have been saved were lost. We can't know that will happen, but we can't know it won't.

That debunks assertions that they know how many lives are saved.

Anyway, after the fate twisting roadblock Sally marries a sociopath who does things of which I cannot speak. Her life is forever plunged into darkness and despair. Biff becomes the Democratic congressman from East San Diego county and introduces a bill requiring everyone to fly naked, wrapped in ten layers of plastic wrap, with little holes poked in it so you can breathe.

Biff's bill results in a drastic increase in the cost of air travel, and necessitates that everyone arrive at the airport 6 hours in advance so they can be stripped, wrapped and loaded by conveyor into the aircraft.

The country then wonders what happened to the air travel industry. Like always, when things go awry, the public media take on it is that it somehow mysteriously happened all of a sudden. Cause and effect has been stricken from the collective mind. Perhaps it has something to do with sensitivity or giving back, or chem trails--who knows?

Because the airline industry demise is so bewildering, the president initiates a plan to bail out the airlines at a cost of 3 trillion dollars.

It turns out the bailout money is not closely followed so the CEOs who supported the president's campaign are able to receive huge bonuses and billion dollar salaries before their companies declare bankruptcy and they resign to take prestigious jobs in the executive branch of government. Then Congress authorizes a second bailout to keep the companies from going under and to get them out of bankruptcy.

All because of a life saving roadblock.

This is what happens when you have policies which treat everyone as guilty before proven innocent and 4th amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure are ignored.

The public was assured by the cheerful TV newslady that "it's a lot safer out on the highways this holiday season!!" She may have had something else to say, but I got distracted trying to look down her blouse.

I'm Not The Only Radical

Great news!! In Georgia, of all places, someone introduced a bill that disputes the notion that driving (use of public thoroughfares), is a privilege instead of a right. I've never gone along with that idea--that driving or any other exercise of freedom is a privilege instead of a right. Who decides who has the right to decide if I can exercise my rights? You cannot grant me privileges which involve my own life and rights. Privilege to travel?

People still have to drive safely--as if they do now--ever driven in Atlanta?--but they can't be forced to be licensed in order to travel.

Georgia Assembly
10 LC 34 2350
House Bill 875
By: Representative Franklin of the 43rd


Go representative Franklin.

At first this sounds so radical and scary, but that is mostly because of conditioning to believe the behavior control and security of the government works out well. I tend to think the idea of a driver's licence was first seen as a source of revenue, then as a way of keeping track of people so they could be hit up for more money later, and the very least of the motives had a thing to do with safety.

I'm astounded that an elected official anywhere would seriously challenge such an accepted, though nefarious, institution.

When something has been hammered into your mind long enough, you tend to accept it and even defend it. Facts often get in the way, and reason does as well.

It's what makes it so easy for wars to keep being waged. Except we don't call it war. That is just one example.

There are many things that are considered necessary, and which have become accepted facets of government and restrictions on rights which we could do without. Those who think the increase in war, crime, sociopathic gang behavior, failing schools, etc. is somehow not the fault of governmental policies and encroachment upon life, would disagree with me. I believe the policies of the last 100 years, and more, have been the root of most evil. There are a couple of things which have gone counter to that, but the reality is these were used to smokescreen very strong moves to restrict the universal rights of all.

I'm back to searching for a hollow tree, far away from anything I know--not sure I will survive in the world as I know it.
That part is my fault.

I don't expect anyone to agree with me, and I know some who are very big on the idea that everything is a privilege, not a right. Guess we'll just continue to disagree, but one day the squeeze of the state will affect your life in an unpleasant manner and you will wonder how it happened.

I suppose I am one who feels at least as threatened, or more, by government than I do by those from which it claims to protect me. Seriously, I do not automatically trust police or government officials regarding any matters whatsoever. You never know what you will get, and it is not right that such human beings have that power which can be used as a weapon on a whim. More power, in many ways, than the power a punk weilds when he holds a gun. Not such a different mentality in many cases.

Something is wrong with the set up when punks and police are often equally antisocial. It's because 90% of police work involves matters which aren't the proper function of government, and which violate basic rights and freedom. Also the methods are generally dishonest and based on the assumption that the average citizen is a a criminal who needs to be caught and trapped doing something evil, like speeding, growing a pot plant, minding his own business without prior permission.

BOTTOM LINE: The main problem is that packing to many people together too tightly, combined with too much central authority over their lives makes for trouble on all fronts. And the temptation to get away from filtering restrictions through the test of if an act constitutes force or fraud--restricts the rights of others--seems too great to resist. Hence you often hear a defense of "We've done nothing illegal" when there has actually been an act of deception or force.

UPDATE: re: right vs privilege -- even if I agree with licensing, (I'm on the fence on that issue), if I demonstrate the skill to safely operate a machine, vehicle, perform a task, etc. it is my right, then to undertake that endeavor. Privilege implies that my right to freely travel, or work, is bestowed upon me by some higher authority, and can for any reason be revoked. I hold that it is my right as long as I am not infringing on the ability of others to exercise their rights.

That is why I do not shout down people with whom I disagree in a public forum. That is not exercising free speech, it is attempting to curb the exercise of that right by the one with whom I disagree.

Right to travel freely is even addressed in the Magna Carta. People forget that the Bill of Rights was limited and intended to reinforce the idea that rights not granted to the government were retained by the people. I tend to believe it is my right to do whatever I please within bounds of not violating rights of others. Many of those rights I would not exercise, like putting opiates in my oatmeal or molesting a particularly affectionate sheep.

On Fourth Thought--Volunteerism

Like other words, such as blow, queer and gay, and even the rainbow itself, the meanings of volunteer and volunteerism have been hijacked to mean something else.

Many schools require so many hours of "volunteer work" before a person can get the high school diploma. If you are being pushed with such a gun to your head, it is hardly a voluntary act. Of course, graduating at all might be considered voluntary, but these activities are done under duress and the education system knows it. School is now for more than imparting knowledge. It is there to serve meals, modify philosophical beliefs and force people to conform to a very narrow view of what constitutes an adult. Freedom fighters need not apply.

Volunteerism is the condition of doing things under one's own volition, by choice. It is a state of freedom, I would think. The antithesis of slavery.

I think the idea that volunteering to pick up roadside trash or to do whatever is considered civic minded by current standards is more noble than working at the local grocery store and doing a good job, is bunk. There is nothing more noble about it. It is nice that people see fit to make life better for someone else because they want to. But if it becomes a thing of pressuring others, and then calling it volunteerism, I don't buy into that scheme.

Now, it makes sense to force those who littered the road in the first place to clean it up. They were going outside the realm of their rights in that case. I've picked up a few bits of debris myself, but not in any organized clean up day effort--just because I found it annoying and thought I might as well do it. If someone had put a camera in my face and labeled me a civic minded volunteer, I would have done something obscene and then gone home immediately.

As a matter of fact, when such things are required, or funded by tax dollars which some would spend in another way, then I'd say it is actually the opposite of volunteerism. It is extortion.

Ever been pushed to contribute to the United Way or one of those on a job, knowing if you said no it would influence your job status, chances for promotion, and general security? I have. That is neither charity, in the true sense, or really voluntary. That is the old buy or die tactic so popular with organized crime.

That is all.

On Third Thought

This has nothing to do the the first or second thoughts below. That is how thoughts work. The actual relevance to the original problem or idea deteriorates as the thing travels through the mind. In my mind, it often takes a sudden turn, or jumps over to another dimension altogether.

In this case, the idea came that great people (what I consider great) do not tie themselves up in trivial concerns. I noticed it when I worked for people who had formed their own companies and achieved success. They employed many people, steered their companies to growth and expansion, and created really awesome work environments.

You always have personality conflicts and all that but the force behind the productive firm always seemed above the trivial conflicts. Their attention was on what mattered. Even when driving, I noticed that they did not take it personal when people did what they do on the highway by being inconsiderate or stupid. Just another obstacle to avoid or get around.

At the time I was more in the mode of wanting to rag on about "that idiot, bablabla". Then I realized that the most successful people in the vehicle were focussed more on where we were going and why, and chose not to waste energy on incidenta trivial resentments. Who knows if it totally carried through to their personal lives, but the focus on the important things in their careers was different from the average person.

And that brought to mind, however big a stretch, a video from 1959 which was recently brought to my attention between Mike Wallace and Ayn Rand. Mike was puffing on a cigarette.

Many people instantly tighten up and recoil at the mention of Ayn Rand or her book, Atlas Shrugged. I'm not one of those, although I understand why some people feel that way. It has a lot to do with how you look at it, and what you understand is the message. Like a lot of things, I take what I consider the best and leave the rest.

The remarkable thing about the interview is that she expressed a view that I have tried to express, yet Mike refused to acknowledge what she had said, framing the next question with the assumption she espoused the exact opposite. What she said was that when companies use and team up with government it is the worst of all systems. I agree with that.

What gets painted as capitalism is actually more a fascist condition. She described it some other way but it was clear that she held those who use government to facilitate their companies' gains in as much contempt as outright dictators. Companies, on their own, restricted from using force or fraud, do not have the ability to oppress and do all the things many associate with mean dirty CORPORATIONS.

To many people, just the word "corporation" has become a negative epithet. That is because what we have are companies which, due to the lack of limits on the power of government, have gained the power to influence when and where our military is used, influence how regulations are written--usually resulting in less competition, and to influence any manner of domestic policies and projects.

I found it interesting that Rand suggested that government had no business involved in economics. I kind of agree. So, where people have been given the idea that her books and philosophy throw a vote of approval to such corporations as GE and many others which are so entwined with government that one could never figure how to begin untying the knot, they have been mistaken.

It was kind of gratifying to me because I like it when someone says things with which I agree. I had never actually read or heard the sentiment so plainly stated in that interview. The issue of companies using government to help bully the public and competition is never discussed when history is taught or related matters are discussed. Instead, the idea that highly successful business is by nature evil and dishonest is put forth without drawing the distinction between outfits that simply do what they do well, and those which gain power and governmental favor.

We've gone so far down the road of control that it is not easy to find companies of size which can exist without the lobbyists and governmental gamesmanship. I've always thought it was not a good thing that government has become the biggest player and concern in most business operations.

The result is not the positive thing I've been told. Even charitable efforts have to filter through government approval due to the tax system. Individual initiative to help someone because that is what you want to do is actually discouraged because it pays better to drive past the guy bleeding in a ditch and throw some money at mosquito nets through an official charity. Of course, I do not believe it is the job of government to reward or punish free choice charitable efforts, or much else for that matter.

Anyway. Atlas Shrugged, in my view, was not intended to be the heartless, hateful outlook that many interpret it as being. The bottom line is that you don't have the right to force people to do what you want, or to take from them what is theirs by force, and that is what we've been doing while painting it as humane and beneficial. It is just a friggin book which had an uncanny sense of the language and attitudes that would become part of our culture. It held the view that these developments were an affront to human, individual rights. Many hold the view that these things somehow promote human rights.

In any case, I am surprised at the emotions Rand and her books trigger in people. But I am surprised by a lot.
Link to interview. There are two or three parts

It seems odd the fact that she escaped Russia at its worst is glossed over. I think she had a great fear of such a state.

On Second Thought

People are what they are. I'm not out to change them. I have enough trouble changing myself, and I do need to change some key elements.
So, if someone else's issues come into play where I have no intentional influence or effect, then it is just the way it is. They'll probably forget about it. Since I don't really get what it is, why worry?

If I ask myself if I would change members of my family, I can't say that I would. It may require a little dance here and there to avoid certain quirks or attitudes, but that is just how they want to be. It is not my job to write their scripts. When I feel like mine is somehow being written, I get defensive if I am caught by surprise. It's like finding out after the scene is played that I recited the wrong lines, and I never planned on being in the scene in the first place. Best reaction is the least reaction.

I suppose I did not like suddenly being on the spot in a circumstance which never crossed my mind. Hell, I'm a thousand miles or more away from the issue. There is absolutely no way to be true to myself and at the same time behave as if I am a normal person who likes to have a little pride in what family I have left. The difficulty here is not my doing. Plenty of other difficulties are and I choose to avoid owning any more dysfunction than I absolutely ought to.

When it comes down to it, this is a common black sheep syndrome. Even when you cast away the worst of what landed you at the bottom of the heap, the fact that you don't have a wall full of awards and credentials, a long and stable family life, or much else that anyone can brag about, cements your role as least respected, and secretly reviled--in an odd kind of way. I suppose it makes it worse when people who've known you all your life tend to indicate a greater appreciation for you than the ones who did everything right, have so much more to show for it, and feel they deserve greater affection and favor by virtue of such accomplishment.

How can I blame them? It is not uncommon for the ones who didn't stray from the path of least insanity to resent their siblings and others who screwed up, self destructed, and returned to life as if they were the prodigal sons, receiving the affection and approval the good ones feel they never get. The dynamic is probably more complex than the ones with the responsible track record realize, but I think they still wonder why, particularly in the case of siblings, the screw up gets coddled and forgiven so easily. If only they could be forever punished, or even banished, seems to be the underlying thought.

Sorry. It just doesn't work that way. It is hard for the upright members of a family to realize that accomplishment is its own reward, and lack of it, coupled with inexplicable bad judgement and self destruction is its own punishment beyond anything they can imagine---even if others in the family treat the black sheep with more affection than they deserve.

Maybe I am lucky that I can see and empathize with both conditions. I feel bad for being the perpetual screw up of my line. But I feel good that I changed as much of that as I have. It could have been much worse and odds were I'd never have lived to see the year 2000.

I'd much rather be in the position to look after all the others rather than be of little use other than that I seem to have the ability to help the various branches of the tree feel like they are worthy of affection and pride.

No More Mr Middleman

When my father was alive, and my mother was alive, I constantly battled the problem of being pushed into the position of middleman. If I happened to see or talk to my father, which was not that often, he would pump me for info about my mother--usually trying to find a way to alter is divorce agreement.

He'd also quiz me about my brother. Not that he didn't have the number.

Actually they all seemed to think it was cool to make me feel some guilt for not being at war with any of them, yet, in a way, it put me at war with all of them. My mother put me in the middle between her and my brother, and to a lesser degree, my father. My brother sometimes did it too. I do not think I put any of them in the middle nearly as much. Almost none at all. It really sucks. Seriously, this is not a good development.

Similar circumstances, different relationships, and I am not pleased. Oh my God, did I let some piece of news slip before the rest of my gene pool could announce it to some other subset of the same goddam gene pool? It is as if my very existence is an awful inconvenience to those who hold grudges over some hurt feelings or vision of wrongdoing of which I am no part and not really a witness. Secrets which make no damned sense are exactly what I grew up with, and what came closer than you'd believe to killing me.

The problem is that it causes conflict with my desire to not disappear from the face of the earth as far as blood kin are concerned. On one hand I do not care to be sucked into believing I have somehow betrayed people, which I haven't. But the only way to distance myself from that ridiculous drama is to do like I did a long time ago--avoid, leave no forwarding address, and keep my phone number to myself.

A little late I guess but I do most of the calling when calling happens. All the calling, actually. I guess the only emails not initiated by me have to do with implications that my existence has created inconvenience. It would be denied, but it is there.

Maybe some in my family just can't stand it if I enjoy anyone else in my family. I think that may have always been the case. Hate me because others don't. I really thought we were past this.

Wallace clearly was ignorant of the fact that majority rule itself is not a holy grail, and that there are supposedly limits on democracy. Otherwise we could all vote that Bill Gates, George Soros, and all other billionaires give all their money to men like me.

HULU.com Movie Review; The Horse Boy

Another find on hulu.com, since I am cable free. The Horse Boy is a documentary film about a family with an autistic boy. I guess he was about seven when this saga began.

The film covers the family's desperate journey to Mongolia of all places, to travel in van and on horseback to the northern region of the reindeer people. Did you know the first animals used for riding were reindeer?

Anyway, they saw shamans and such, which may sound crazy and new agey, but the flick is not like that. These parents had nothing to lose, and both had backgrounds in going to strange places in the world for one reason or another. His work is pretty much centered around that sort of thing, and he has seen all kinds of healing rituals and whatnot.

The wife was more skeptical, but what's to lose?

The adventure they had, camping in the middle of nowhere Mongolia with their guide, and riding horses to the reindeer herd was visually beautiful and a great off road, road trip. The other part of the adventure was seeing the progress of their child. In their shoes, even the thought of one day toilet training the kid seemed beyond all hope.

An interesting aspect of his progress is that it all started due to his uncanny comfort with animals, and their comfort with him. It has been observed that some autistic people have an inexplicable connection to animals which is mutual. Almost telepathic. Animals seem to sense something special in them and react differently.

I may have a little more interest than most in those who are wired differently or not at all. Not sure why. I have my theories. Whatever the reason, I have always felt at home with people who were severely or mildly mentally disabled or different.

This was not a sappy, cheap tearjerker. This is purely an excellent and enthralling documentary which I highly recommend. And it appears that the ranch they set up for autistic kids in Texas may be on my way, should I get this new improved BallisticTour on the road. I might ask them for a job. I think it would be difficult not to take a job if they offered it, but that's a big long shot. At any rate, I'd love to stop by to see the place and the people.

Many documentaries are boring, and lack the sort of flow you want when watching a movie. This one is not like that. It is paced like a good story, and it avoided the kind of goop and sap that usually fills the voids in such works. beautifully done.

And, I tend to like horses so I guess that helps, although it wasn't all horse stuff by any means.

Questions I Ask Myself-sometimes

Within the context of still being the person that I am, what would be my heaven on earth? What would I change about my daily life?

The crazy thing is that, even when I am deep in the blues, I have a hard time picturing what I would change about my world, probably because most changes I try to think would be good are within my power to influence--if I am brutally honest with myself about it.

I'm not referring to impossible things like, oh I'd have the dream wife and seven kids. That is not too likely to happen and you don't need to be having kids at this age. I mean realistic heaven within the context of my present state of existence. That wouldn't discount the dream mate. No more than I know, and judging from the track record, I wouldn't know the dream mate if she bit me somewhere nice.

If I indulge the common fantasy of winning the big lottery, considering what I'd do with that bundle of money, my first thought is usually how to enhance someone else's life without the cash ruining their perspective and character. People always say they know what they'd do if the money fell on them, but I don't know if they realize it wouldn't make them better all by itself, and it may not be the easy street they think. That is why so many lotto winners wind up worse off than they were after only a few years. No question that financial security is a huge relief compared to being broke.

When I think of myself in that context I realize that to do it right, I'd need to change some habits and behavior. Then it hits me that there is no logical reason why I have to wait for the heavens to drop a chest of gold at the foot of my bed in order to affect those changes. That is how I kid myself. Even though I thought I was beyond it, obviously there are still some "if only x then I would Y" floating around in my mind.

The truth is, if I really wanted to be able to help myself and others monetarily, I could do the work, overcome the fear, and do things which are more likely to bring substantial income. I am not doing my best in that regard.

Perhaps what limits my ability to actually decide how I want things to be, what would make me feel the most fulfilled and worthwhile, is fear of one color or another. That is a tough pill to swallow since it is not hard for the mildly creative to find a million reasons why I am how I am, where I am, and even a victim who could be so much more, if only everything in the world or just this country fell my way. The righteous way.

Changing any pattern of behavior is a bitch. That does not make it impossible.
At least I hope not. The path of least resistance for me is often dysfunctional, and ultimately the path of least contentment, fulfillment and reward.

Not to worry. We shall prevail.

Madness on High/good news-bad news

TSA says, "Recognizing that terrorists are willing to manipulate societal norms to evade detection, TSA has been actively assessing less invasive screening methods for low-risk populations, such as younger passengers, while still maintaining a high level of security."

That is what justifies patting down infants and such. If you let yourself go too far thinking anyone could be a bomber, then all of your neighbors, family, everyone is burdened with proving their innocence. And the thinking carries over to all aspects of life; my partner could be a thief, my wife could be unfaithful, my brother could be a child molester, that boyfriend or girlfriend or first date could be a serial killer--after all, it is always the one you don't suspect. Right?

Best to fear and suspect everyone. That way you are safer. Living free and happy obviously needs to take a back seat. After all the worst could happen.

You could insert DEA, the tobacco, alcohol, firearms people, IRS, or just about any other government agency, in place of the word "terrorists" in the above statement, and the bold part of the phrase would be equally valid. Maybe more so.

That just crossed my mine when I saw it.

I'm still thinking about the big trip. A couple of things are causing me to wonder whether I will do it or not. Most likely, I will hit the road.

In good news: re-connected with old friend and long ago drinking buddy. He blames me for contributing to his success at quitting alcohol 13 years ago. I wasn't even in town at the time. Must have been a phone call and putting him in touch with another friend. This is probably the only friend from high school that I have reason to keep in the loop, and one of my closest friends ever. Lately, the long time friends that were long lost have returned. "The chickens have come home to roost", to paraphrase that Chicago rabble rouser in the holy man suit.

In bad news: I just heard that a friend's adopted son, 26, died of alcohol poisoning. He and another guy were binge drinking with friends, got dropped off at home, and was found dead. Bizarrely, the other guy was also found dead--I guess at his respective dwelling. I knew alcohol could be trouble, but I thought it was hard to stay conscious enough to drink so much that it kills you. I always passed out or ran into something but what do I know?

The bad news above is kind of tough. There had been talk awhile back of a possible conversation on the topic between the deceased and myself. Never happened. I said I was available but someone has to want my opinion or knowledge. Can't force people. It is really bad news when things like this happen. Some of the things that go on are more extreme and self destructive than people think. To say every generation shocks the last, so no big deal, is a half truth. Methods improve and behavior finds further extremes.

What happens is advanced cultures fall under the weight of their addiction to entertainment, excitement, and taking things to the edge. Then in time new civilizations emerge, full of values and a work ethic, then the kids reap the benefits, get complacent, raise spoiled idiots and the whole thing repeats.

The spoiled idiots of our culture, who have ensured the decline, would be the baby boomers. The idiots who created them are the ones mislabeled "the greatest generation". They were not the greatest. Some of them were splendid, but on the whole they queered the deal. They were the last of the tough people, but they had lost the values of those who came before. They were the group who made seeking one's happiness at the expense of vows, family, and others an acceptable outlook. They made it cool. You were hardly a man in many circles if you weren't playing victim to the ex wife or the kids. The result was not good.

They were good soldiers but dumb as hell when it came to knowing when war is sane and when it is not, hence they were all for anything politicians dreamt up, Korea, VietNam, etc. And they accepted the police action mode of warfare, which proved far more brutal and cruel than if they'd just bombed a place into submission. Maybe without a real goal that isn't possible.
Greatest generation? Only if you ignore those who preceded them.

If you had grown up on my street, you'd know that half the men were named Bob, and all of them were jerks who thought nothing of cheating on their wives with Bob's wife, and who thought the only people who shouldn't be allowed to lie were children. On that street, the only people who weren't liars and betrayers actually were kids, but only a couple of them. And maybe one or two women.

That group does not fit my definition of great. They allowed WW1 and WW2 to develop, then got in the fray to clean up the idiotic diplomacy that allowed it. They were as manipulated as we are by elite powers that be whose motives still baffle me. I do believe none of these wars is as represented.

What the hell. It makes as much sense to run six year old American girls through the wringer at the airport as any thing else makes.

Anything except just living life, remembering the people who are close and you love, and recognizing the beauty of the place, doing what makes humans human. All the rest is garbage and nonsense.

Add It All Up--the sum equals They Are All Crazy

Marijuana causes global warming, uses 1% of U.S. electricity
San Francisco Business Times - by Steven E.F. Brown
Date: Tuesday, April 12, 2011, 10:38am PDT - Last Modified: Tuesday, April 12, 2011, 10:46am PDT
Related: Health Care, Energy

The rest of the article is HERE, but it is not a must read by any means.

I did notice that this in depth analysis, or study, did not account for the CO2 converted to O2 by the plants under the grow lights. Nor did they take into account the often slowed rate of the users. Many potheads tend to relax rather than run around exerting themselves, breathing too hard, using up oxygen.

There is a point at which I honestly wonder where I was when the bulk of minds in this country were infused with a type of thinking as foreign to me as that of a rabid rabbit. Men and women in very expensive suits, with perfectly straight faces publicly explain that in order to keep things running in the federal government (and they assume that we all want it to keep running) the ceiling on debt needs to be raised beyond its present 14.3 trillion dollar limit.

We aren't talking spending limits here. This is just the amount owed, or some version of it. Those same well dressed, serious faced people often find ways to call things one thing and also call other things that thing. OK. So, out of the clear blue sky, these people spent 14 trillion more than they have?

Never mind. It just seems a bit odd that they argue that they need to borrow more in order to do who knows what. Wars of choice to achieve stability have obviously not achieved stability. The usual counter to that is that it is more stable that it would have been--even though the stability index appears to keep going more toward the unstable end of the spectrum.

They maybe borrow to spend more on education? That's working out well. If I detect a pattern, then if we double the money we throw at that we'll be number 150 or so in the world. Maybe the US will even end up the least competent in all educational measures. That's worth borrowing to achieve.

Something probably works out that justifies borrowing, and then borrowing more. The War on Drugs has certainly been cost effective. That's well spent money for sure. Since that effort started, drug use and organized crime formed for the drug trade have all but disappeared. That is true, isn't it?

Best thing to do is identify and destroy all things that produce CO2 since it has become the devil. Wait a minute. That means you have to shoot me and Sparky, the missing ferret. Just doesn't seem fair.

If they quit growing pot then the have to make up for the CO2 the pot plants would eat. I just don't think these things have been thought out.

Now Bolivia and some other highly enlightened countries want to get the UN to list a bill of rights for Mother Earth.

I'm not on the same page. I don't believe in destroying things or being cruel to animals--except the real jerks like park bears--but I can't get behind some of these bizarre efforts to treat the earth as a litigant in court and in law making. Obviously someone has to be the self appointed advocate, and that means lawyers. I'm waiting for them to put their client on the stand. I want to see that.

Everyone is entitled to their own diverse viewpoints, but that doesn't mean some of them are not crazy. They most certainly are, even if they do wear nice clothes..

PS. if you see the video of Biden sleeping during the President's sales pitch, check out the chick at the top of the screen--Black woman with glasses. She's fighting it too. She had one of those doze/nod head jerks. This actually makes me like Biden better than before. Not saying a lot, but it is something.