1. Audible tattoos (there is no great stagnation).
2. CapX covers Complacent Class.
3. Amanda Knox on Donald Trump and Jon Haidt.
4. The cooperative benefits of homophily, and, alternatively, venture capitalists and daughters.
5. The Erie Canal makes a comeback (NYT).
#6 The engineer is the father of the nations.
I agree in part. The INTJ engineer is the father of all nations. No other personality combined with capability provides the mastery and knowledge of variant disciplines to build the foundation needed. The INTJ engineer provides systems building ability at the theoretical level as well as the ability to focus on the detail.
The INFP engineer is even better because he is a man with a cision, he is not a mere mercenary, a mere animal pulling a cart under the merciless whip of unthinking necessity. He cares not about carrots and whips, bit about his mission. To build a railroad, make it run,
make it race against time, ro build a tower to the sun, brick and rivet and lime.
man with a Vision.
Either way, I’m the guy signing the paychecks.
But I am the man with the Vision. Your money has no vision, it can not add new worlds to our world. Money did not discover America, Columbus did. Money did not create the germ theory of diseases, Pasteur did. Money did not comwuer five World Cups, Brazil did. Money did not invent the airplane, Brazilians did.
Thiago, you’re fired.
I can take my business elsewhere.
Engineers are losers who earn a small fraction of what a lawyer or ibanker earns.
my amzn stock begs to differ.
That’s evidence for JAMRC’s point. The reward goes to the investors rather than the actual engineers. Law is more egalitarian, all the big name law firms are partnerships, it’s not winner take all. And that setup isn’t an accident. Engineers might have it different if they had unions, but the mentality seems to be that unions are for losers, and engineers are sensitive about being called losers.(I’m not an engineer but have an engineering degree. )
The legal profession has a bimodal distribution of compensation. It’s really two professions with distinct career paths, and the bulk of its practitioners are part of the broad middle class with fluctuating incomes and scads of deadbeat clients. Government lawyers have regular working hours and regular incomes, but without the opportunity for any big scores.
Even if you score an associate’s position in BigLaw, chances are you will not be one of the modest minority who score a partnership.
Now look at the intake pipe: the likelihood that this year’s law graduates will actually build a career in law is now about 40%. You might have marginally worse prospects if you were seeking a career as a humanities professor. (You might also have lower student debt).
A whole lot of lawyers can’t even find jobs that require a law degree and more struggle to earn enough to pay off the law school loans. Top shelf lawyers and ibankers do earn a lot, but top-earning engineers are in a completely higher class (Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Jeff Bezos, Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, Sergei Brin). What about investment bankers? And all those engineering and math nerds who became tech billionaires? They’ve transformed society for the better. Wall-Street bankers? Biglaw partners? Good luck making that argument.
Fish see the sea but they are colorblind so they can’t make out the coral for what it is which is colorful, sepia fish are self-aware fish but they hate coral, and they ask every one of the fish they see, who is the old man of the sea?
Almost None of the People you list are engineers. You do realize that programmer != engineer right? I have no idea when learning JavaScript made someone an engineer but whatever it just Shows what a loser “Profession” it is. You do realize the typical engineer isn’t going anywhere near Silicon Valley and they’re more likely scrapping around some Midwestern shithole earning like 75K tops. Even most programmers are basically on the verge of being replaced by some Indian guy for 50% of the salary.
Ibankers transform society for the better almost by definition otherwise they wouldn’t earn huge bonuses and salaries. The market rewards people according to how much benefit they produce.
While it’s hard to tell if the clown nose is off or on, those in architectural and engineering occupations number 2.4 million and earn a median of $79,000 plus benefits. The most handsomely compensated are computer hardware engineers whose median cash salary is $115,000 per year. The least are land surveyors whose is $59,000 per year. About 2.1% of a typical age cohort has acquired an engineering degree in recent years. About 1.6% of the working population are employed as engineers or in allied trades. Five years of tertiary schooling is typical for an engineer.
The median annual compensation for lawyers is about $118,000. About 1.1% of a typical age cohort has been earning law degrees in recent years. Lawyers account for 0.45% of the working population. Seven years of tertiary schooling is typical for a lawyer.
“Investment bankers’ is not a BLS occupational category.
“Financial Managers” have a median salary of $121,000. “Securities, Commodities, and Financial Services Sales Agents” have a median salary of $67,000. The former number about 540,000 and the latter 350,000. The most handsomely compensated Financial Managers are employed in “Securities and Commodity Contracts Intermediation and Brokerage” and are paid about 40% in excess of a generic financial manager. There are, however, only 14,000 such people.
While we’re at it, the median annual salary for pharmacists is $122,000.
Of Course as for me the cuck nose is always on – or the cuck antlers more accurates! WINK!
I can’t even type properly too busy watching Cuckold Pr0n
Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates never even completed college. Jeff Bezos did do an engineering degree but he spent his early career in finance including a stint at the quantitative hedge fund D.E. Shaw. A few smart people who are good at math and programming have been able to leverage the internet to make huge amounts of money but it is a stretch to call some of these people “engineers.”
Where would you even go though?
Lots of lawyers + investment bankers can’t even get jobs in their fields. I suspect the top 10% of lawyers + investment bankers probably have more wealth + power + than the top 10% of engineers. But the bottom 90% of engineers probably has a better paying job and more reliable work than the bottom 90% of lawyers and investment bankers.
INTP!
Whilst the plot of good will hunting is alice in wonderland, the wunderkind zebra story is a face-off mask for the plot mechanics, which is told in a joke by Milan Kundera. For me, I didn’t get the joke that won a world war of epic proportions.
#6 Wasn’t one of Tom Friedman’s worries in “The World Is Flat” that China and India were really cranking out the engineers?
Naturally as an (unlicensed) engineer I support this thesis. Probably the category should be a bit wider though .. applied technologists?
#3 I read this earlier and was impressed by it. Douthat is on a similar vibe today:
https://twitter.com/DouthatNYT/status/869596129993863169
You have only to read the followup comments to realize that ain’t going to happen. They aren’t smart. It isn’t in their nature.
They actually think that racism is coming back in style.
Do you sleep with a nightlight because racists?
No. That’s my whole point. The more alt-right people I encounter, the stupider and more easily defeated they seem. It’s actually kind of amusing watching them rip their masks off and run around wooting and high-fiving eachother. They’re making it very, very, clear who they really are.
Have you encountered any alt right people in real life, or has your experience been entirely in internet comment sections and Leftist point and sputter articles which highlight people who are probably agents(Anglin, ect)?
FWIW I’ve found people surprisingly open to my race realist views. I think we’re certainly moving in the right direction
“Race realism” is realism in the same way as “I’m, like, a really smart person” says Mr Trump is smart.
As far as the trend,
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/intermarriage-in-the-u-s-50-years-after-loving-v-virginia/
The left thinks that IQ is fake, crime statistics only demonstrate innate white evil, western society has no more merit than Iranian society, that people should be given jobs, education, and money on the basis of their skin color and sex, that biology has little impact on sexual orientation, that it is wrong for white women to make burritos, that it is acceptable to have lynch mobs chase University Presidents, that the midwest is a barren, stupid, fat place, that if you aren’t attracted to obese you are misogynist, that if you aren’t attracted to transgender people that you are transphobic, that if you aren’t attracted to black women you are racist, that if you are a white man that you haven’t worked for anything you have, that pronouns are the choice of the individual and if I want to be addressed as a 16 digit number and you get that number wrong you have a problem, that Islam’s promises of heaven for martyrs has nothing to do with terrorism, that the browning of America is something to be celebrated rather than neutral, and that anyone who is white and disagrees with them is deplorable, and anyone who is black and disagrees with them is a house slave.
The left’s primary focus today is attacking social justice on the basis of skin color and gender, according to their preferences. Racism, sexism, and every other ism are DNC priorities.
@Thomas: nice caricature. If there really is anyone who thinks like that, you are talking about a dozen people, tops. I could do one for “rightists” or even “alt-rightists” and you would correctly dismiss that as well.
that biology has little impact on sexual orientation, t
Au contraire, the media / college dean orthodoxy is that ‘sexual orientation’ is altogether innate. Social conservatives tend to dissent from that view, and people in the mental health trade who do are sometimes subject to harassment from professional associations and state governments. (BTW, discordance among identical twins is at least as common as homosexual twin sets, so it isn’t altogether innate).
@Thomas: nice caricature. If there really is anyone who thinks like that, you are talking about a dozen people, tops. I could do one for “rightists” or even “alt-rightists” and you would correctly dismiss that as well.
IQ is fake: most leftists don’t believe that IQ measures intelligence, effects life outcomes, and varies across population groups.
Crime stats demonstrate evil: most leftists don’t believe that population groups commit crime at different rates, or, if they do, it is because of environmental factors controlled by white people.
The value of western society: most leftists believe that cultures aren’t better or worse. The entire field of anthropology is a leftist exercise in this delusion.
jobs, education, money: most leftists believe in affirmative action by race and sex for government jobs and college admissions, a smaller portion believe in affirmative action mandated in the private sector, a smaller portion still believe in reparations.
burritos: the small, vocal group of SJWs attacked white women in Portland recently for cultural appropriation, a concept accepted in all critical studies fields.
lynch mobs: BLM holds University Presidents hostage with some regularity and enjoys support from the DNC, members of which recently called for the exclusion of white men from the DNC positions of power
the midwest: I just listened to NPR last night. They were complaining about the experience of obese women shopping. They played an Amy Schumer clip. The clip ended with the clerk suggesting Amy call the midwest. The “flyover states”, the “deplorables”, “what’s wrong with Kansas”. The midwest is a whipping boy for most leftists.
Healthy at every size: a small minority on the left, including just about every single leftist woman support fat acceptance, which includes the changing of “societal expectations”, ie: what men find attractive
transphobia: this one is new but it is coming up, trust me. Don’t be transphobic!
Racist beauty: this goes all the way back to OKCupid and the RACISM! its study PROVED!
I’ll stop now. Why bother? This stuff is core leftism today. It’s in the NYT, on CNN, on campuses, and even here at MR! You’d be blind not to see this new Maoism.
“Au contraire, the media / college dean orthodoxy is that ‘sexual orientation’ is altogether innate. Social conservatives tend to dissent from that view, and people in the mental health trade who do are sometimes subject to harassment from professional associations and state governments. (BTW, discordance among identical twins is at least as common as homosexual twin sets, so it isn’t altogether innate).”
Art, the left has no problem with contradictions. Biology isn’t determinative but being gay is innate. A look to the future is Canada, where by simple proclamation and signature one can become any gender one chooses.
You can use 5573849384648393 as my pronoun, and if you don’t you’re a transphobe, or in Canada, you are breaking the law (but infinite genders is an outlier!!!!).
You are easily enraged, Thomas. Settle down.
“Homosexuality (or heterosexuality) being innate os probably a different proposition from “some people don’t feel right at their bodies” or their classic “women can not do Math due to their girlish brains”. Biology is determinative enough that I will never be 7 feet, not that there is a superior race.
Superiority is a value judgement. Women are represented in mathematics research in proportion to their representation at >140iq. There is a reason graduate schools in every discipline have to accept women at lower LSAT, MCAT, GRE, GMAT, etc. If you think that makes women inferior, that is your problem.
” If you think that makes women inferior, that is your problem.”
If Larry Summers thinks they are inferior, it is their problem. “During Dr Summers’s presidency, the number of tenured jobs offered to women has fallen from 36% to 13%. Last year, only four of 32 tenured job openings were offered to women.” https://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/jan/18/educationsgendergap.genderissues
did you see the glare-blue light at hoyt-schermherhorn?
People who have no meaningful intellectual accomplishments are eager to present their race of gender as evidence of their superiority.
I honestly don’t know what to do with Hazel. She’s not really stupid like mulp, but she’s just too dumb to compete in the circles she tries to swim in.
Hazel,
And people who are lowlifes and cunts(who am I thinking of here?) are eager to present their race or gender as evidence of their virtue.
“(BTW, discordance among identical twins is at least as common as homosexual twin sets, so it isn’t altogether innate)”
Absolutely and I know of no credible person who claims homosexuality is 100% genetic. The debate is over whether sexual preference is a choice or whether it is something that — like one’s height as an adult — is determined by interactions of genetic and non-genetic factors in early life over which one has little say.
I yugely enjoy being called racist by intolerant, violent people that know nothing about me, except that I voted for Trump.
The real question, Dick, is why you volunteer?
Obviously there are racists in the world. It would be foolish to pretend there are none. So when Hazel mentions them, why do you step up and say that’s you?
The other game plan is to say “I am a conservative, but I am not a racist, and the racists don’t speak for me.” Easy. Done.
Hazel, I think the general population is trending to less racism, but the vanishing type is becoming more vocal. Desperate.
Anon, I love you, man.
Yeah, I agree. The surprising thing, or perhaps not so surprising, is how many racists have convinced themselves that things are moving in the other direction. It’s almost like someone is playing them – make them feel safe, get them to let the mask slip. But then they decided to rip it off entirely.
Anonymous is there in spirit with Eric Clanton, lecturer in Ethics, the black-clad Social Justice Anti Market Soldier, who has been arrested for cracking people in the head with a metal bike lock. Evergreen college just instituted a no-whites day and are threatening to kill a white professor who decline the “invitation” to stay away, yet concern trolls like Hazel pretend that Stormfront is taking over, and not the literal racists that just made up the last administration and operate the NYT, the Washpo, CNN, Academia, etc. NYC is celebrating an F****** terrorist on the basis of his skin color during their Puerto Rican Day Parade and this has enough cultural cache that a city councilor had no problem going on Cable TV to defend honoring a murdering terrorist. Let me know the next time Jeff Sessions give Dylan Klebold an award at a white pride parade, you clown.
Thomas, when you go from “Easy. Done.” to “cracking people in the head with a metal bike lock”
It might be about you, buddy.
Get off the web and do something healthy and rewarding.
You would never read in the LA Times about Amanda Knox if she supported President Donald J. Trump. I wouldn’t read the La Times because it’s 100% bull shit.
Being accused of murder does not a savant make.
Being a conservative male (from experience liberals and women cannot understand normal thinking) saves me the embarrassed caused by the publicized idiots that represent fake feminism.
I am glorying in my President. And, I’ll vote Trump again in 2020.
Writing in your vote is throwing it away
Yeah, and your Hillary vote was just SO valuable. Moron.
My Gary Johnson vote was worthless because I don’t live in a swing state. Why does the fact that Trump won’t be running in 2020 trigger you so?
Msgkings was confidently predicting a Hillary victory all through 2016. He’s still in denial mode.
I was far from the only one predicting that. Not sure what I’m in denial about, she obviously lost. Who’s denying that?
I’m now predicting Trump won’t be the Rep nominee in 2020, for any number of possible reasons. Maybe I’ll be wrong about that too, whatever.
I’m stumbling over Poe’s Law on this one.
The alt-right tests that Law pretty regularly.
The National Review is running a big bold experiment in Poe’s Law:
I have concluded that there are a few reasons that explain conservatives who were Never-Trumpers during the election, and who remain anti-Trump today.
The first and, by far, the greatest reason is this: They do not believe that America is engaged in a civil war, with the survival of America as we know it at stake.
Civil war. Survival. I don’t really see that.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448086/never-trump-conservatives-donald-trump-still-opposed
#1 As if they weren’t for the most part horribly ugly and disfiguring for most people you can now add that hideousness to an extra sensory input. Lovely. Kind of like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAWoP1kncRE).
At least selecting to listen to it is, at this point, optional. Surely a sign of the end times I’m certain of it…
If no one is around a tattoo of a falling tree and its beares is deaf , does it make a sound?
I can never tell if the bear is or not a root bear.
I wonder more and more if The Complacent Class is really just a modern morality tale akin to Gibbon’s Decline and Fall. “We have become to decadent, comfortable, complacent and soft, therefore we are losing our edge and will soon reach our end”. Cf. Voltaire’s “History is filled with the sound of silken slippers coming downstairs and wooden shoes going up”
#3. Amanda Knox is smart. Who knew????
I think she was made mature by her difficult experiences, and when this — and some reading — is allied to some native intelligence, you get “smart”.
I see her as a superior Dem candidate to Chelsea Clinton. Knox-Clinton 2020, lol. (See how Trump has made us grasp at straws for a non-Warren, non-Sanders candidate?)
She appears to have read Johnathan Haidt and also researched Donald Trump’s past positions on the Central Park Five. I can certainly see how she might have gotten an education in legal theory but she seems to have branched out significantly beyond that. I don’t see a politician though. She should be a political columnist.
Both Knox and Clinton are way too young to run for president in 2020. Think Winfrey/Newsom
Are we sure she is innocent?
Yep. 100%. Don’t even read about her case. Go read Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi’s The Monster of Florence and when you get to the end you’ll discover that it was the same lunatic prosecutor inventing fantastic tales both cases (and threatening to charge anyone and everyone with crimes when challenged).
Yes. It has all the hallmarks of a coerced confession (she randomly fingered an innocent man) and the prosecuters version of events reads like some sort of hard-core horror-porn. She, her boyfriend, and her boss were supposedly all engaged in a bizarre sex game supposedly involving raping her roommate with a knife. Because Americans just do that sort of thing. Also, “See you later” as a text message really means an agreement to meet later that same night for your secret sex rendezvous.
Blaming a random innocent person is exactly what you expect a guilty person to do. And it was Rudy Guede, not her boss, who prosecutors said committed the murder with Knox and her boyfriend.
She’s probably not guilty, but there’s more evidence that wasn’t reported or was glossed over by the MSM.
She’s probably not guilty, but there’s more evidence that wasn’t reported or was glossed over by the MSM.
There was no evidence. There was no confession. She was bullied into offering a fantasy scenario.
The biological material at the scene was Guede’s. The prosecution tried to embroider lab test results to implicate Knox and Sollecito and law enforcement destroyed his computer which harbored digital data which would have showed what they were doing on that computer during the time frame of the murder.
She confessed to having committed the murder WITH him. Sorry that wasn’t clear.
If you’re guilty, you don’t confess to committing the murder with someone that the police thinks you’re dating on the basis of a misinterpreted American colloquialism.
No, Rudy Guede is an unrelated person who was separately convicted. It was Patrick
Got cut off. The police’s initial story was that it was Patrick Lumumba that she commited the murder with. There’s no known relationship whatsoever between Knox and Guede, whose fingerprints were found on the scene. Absolutely no evidence that she even knew him. His trial was completely separate, and even though he was convicted, the police still prosecuted Knox. Apparently in Italy two different people can be convicted of committing the same crime.
She’s always been smart and thoughtful, but also something of an odd duck. I’m pretty sure she’s somewhere on the spectrum. The prosecutor is a nut-job, but I don’t think Knox would ever have come under suspicion if it weren’t for her odd affect and behaviors. Watch the Netflix movie, and you’ll see what I mean.
That makes it worse. She was wrongly convicted of murder because people think she’s “wierd”.
Yep, but not just that. She was also accused in part because she was young, female, attractive, sexually active, and American. Not that those factors are going to make you feel any better. It was all just too irresistible for the prosecutor who fancies himself the Italian Sherlock Holmes, able to ferret out murderers using the tiniest, subtlest of clues that other mortals miss (e.g. the murderer *had* to be female because the body was covered by a blanket, and only a woman would do that — no I’m not kidding). The craziest thing about the case was that, inconveniently, they already had the real murderer (who, BTW, by now has already served his time and been released) and they had to shoehorn Knox and her boyfriend into the case somehow, despite the lack of connection and evidence.
Worse? Maybe we should only wrongly convict people of murder for good reasons. Like being a normie or something. That’d be legit.
I think you missed her point, which was in response to Slocum. Why should her being an “odd duck” be relevant to her guilt?
I think you missed my point. Who the hell goes around ranking different scenarios for being wrongly convicted for murder? I suppose the levels of victim status grind exceeding fine.
There’s the baseline (act normal, no extra guilt attaches) and the difference (act weird, they think you did it). It’s not ranking scenarios. You seem personally offended here.
People shouldn’t be targeted for prosecution based on superficial factors like popularity, looks, personality or skin color.
Sometimes people get wrongly convicted based on a botched investigation, circumstantial evidence, etc. Picking on someone because they are wierd and people let prejudice get in the way is worse than just making investigative mistakes.
Actually she was wrongly convicted of murder because of the sexual fantasies of the prosecutor – but also because she was White and American. Anti-Americanism always goes down well in Italy. They had a suspect in custody. They had his DNA everywhere. They had his bloody handprint at the scene. He had priors for similar crimes.
But he was Black. An African immigrant.
So that racism you decry meant that everyone wanted to blame someone else. Why not a bizarre sex game gone wrong? There was not one shred of evidence to support it, but at least it meant charging some White people.
I don’t think racism was as big a factor as anti-Americanism here. Plus a little bit of sexism and the prosecutor’s lust for fame.
Knox came under suspicion because both she and Raffaele Sollecito were confused and contradicted each other regarding the precise sequence of events of how they came to discover the body. The police bulled Knox into offering a fanciful account which they then claimed was a confession (something Knox denied within hours). Once they were committed, it was in for a dime, in for a dollar.
Law enforcement proceeded to destroy the hard drive on Sollecito’s machine wherein was the record of their computer use the previous evening. If you fancy that wasn’t deliberate or that the data on the computer was anything but inconvenient to the case they wanted to make, I’m vending bridges. They then failed to secure the crime scene and contended they had, from a sample collected 7 weeks after the fact, found a minute quantity of Sollecito’s DNA on Meredith Kircher’s bra strap. (Rudy Guede’s DNA and fingerprints were readily discoverable in Kercher’s room).
The prosecutor offered the preposterous thesis that two theretofore benign individuals (who had been acquainted for about two weeks) conspired with a third person that neither one could be shown to have ever met to (a) proposition Meredith Kercher to engage in a wild sex game and (b) kill her when she refused to co-operate.
At least one Italian jury, the British press, and Kercher’s family lapped it right up.
Italy has only about 500 murders a year, so you don’t expect to have a corps of experienced homicide investigators outside of Naples. That may be part of this disaster. The rest was just vicious abuse of power to protect the pride (and promote the careers) of various public officers.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence
Don’t know if anybody is still reading, but this struck me as interesting. I had never looked into this before, but could it be that in people are overlooking evidence in their desire to feel righteous anger?
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/anti-amanda-knox-deceptive-wiki/
Yeah, there are a bunch of people, particular Kerchner’s family and the British press, who are convinced she is guilty. So there is a dedicated group of people out there willing and ready to gin up a story that convicts her.
It works both ways, though. There is a PR firm dedicated to promoting the opposite narrative. I didn’t follow this story, but I’m wondering why everyone seems so sure of themselves.
Or you could take a look at:
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/amanda-knox-italian-justice-on-trial/
3. What’s amusing isn’t what Cox says about Trump but what she implies about Haidt. I believe the expression is hoist with his own petard.
She implies nothing whatsoever about Haidt. She offers a very brief summary of one of his descriptions.
I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who picked up on that.
yes it’s a weird misrepresentation, as if Haidt is saying loyalty is OK but conservatives have too much of it and so they blindly support the wrong things. The point of Haidt’s moral foundations is that they are all good things, and the issue is (as he sees it) that liberals are quite weak on some of them (purity, loyalty) and end up at cross purposes when talking with conservatives. He could be right or wrong but there is no sense in Haidt that the problem is that people have too much of one moral foundation, his point is that the problem is when they lack understanding of moral foundations they don’t value.
It’s not a misrepresentation of Haidt, it’s a criticism. She’s not saying he holds the positions she’s criticizes in the article, she’s saying those absurd results are the end result of his position.
Haidt is mentioned in one sentence. She’s not criticizing him. His work aspires to be descriptive, not normative, and social psychology is not her book. Rayward has his nose out of joint about Haidt because Haidt also thinks progtrash have damaged higher education, something that’s obvious but that rayward does not wish to own up to.
That you think Haidt’s argument that conservatives are more moral than liberals is a descriptive claim tells any reason person all they need to know. She’s pretty clearly trashing Haidt’s understanding of loyalty throughout the article.
Haidt’s argument is that conservatives have a different conception of morality which has more components. That’s a positive statement, not a normative one.
Fair weather fans are playing baseball, the ivy league is actually wasting time, fair weather fans are actually playing basketball outside in the cold, hard winter. In the city, well, yeah I went to see about a girl when Derek Jeter threw that wedge on the ivy league. But still, the snows of I won’t do what you want me to do.
+1
tu Crois que je suis Orphelin, cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war.
In such an atmosphere, as where water falls, such as the suez falls in Buenos aires, my woolzed tongue will wag, as sam cooke sung.
Easy for you to say.
ur mother gave you add on purposely
Thanks,
Thekla Penz
Generation Y fought two Vietnams at once entirely as volunteers and with a tenth of the casualties. Doesn’t seem complacent.
Baby Boomers managed two big wars without letting them become Vietnams and without allowing inflation to skyrocket. Presidents Bush and Obama are the real heroes.
Sorry Stefanie Rabatsch,
Thanks August Wilson.
Betcha those tattoos will become unplayable in a few years.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4477706
and I recognise this road, as the town where you was born.
and I seeing things, through a young mothers eyes
my hands are rough; my hands are rough
from moving such high mountains
i’ll surrender peacefully
and I recongise this road as a royal canopied road
and he shimmered like a dim opal on the horizon
and now, I know a farther-visioned road
and now, I know he did not ever not love.
#3…Dr. Johnson now said, a certain eminent political friend of ours [Burke] was wrong, in his maxim of sticking to a certain set of men on all occasions. “I can see that a man may do right to stick to a party,” said he; “that is to say, he is a Whig, or he is a Tory, and he thinks one of those parties upon the whole the best, and that to make it prevail, it must be generally supported, though, in particulars, it may be wrong. He takes its faggot of principles, in which there are fewer rotten sticks than in the other, though some rotten sticks to be sure; and they cannot be well separated. But, to blind one’s self to one man, or one set of men (who may be right to-day and wrong to-morrow), without any general preference of system, I must disapprove.”
Boswell: Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides
Nice quotation
brilliant
Give me the tree’s the root, O Lono!
Give me the ear of the tree, O Lono!
Rise up, Nautilius for I have been waiting six days and have just been struck across my bronze cheek. And I ran forth with the blood drawing from my cheek and now, you see mon cher, I have cut your Achilles. And his hawk-like face he looked down upon goliath, yeah, and his arm was slung across his chest like a tentacle, yeah and Aalap was in no hurry to defeat his enemy. He looked up at the ocean depths of clouds in the blue sky and took his pyramid for Giza and sliced across the beast’s neck and even as he sliced he watched the slouchy beast shrivel up as shrunken mummy.
-Jack London Stories of Hawaii (The Water Baby)
This new comment-bot still makes more sense than mulp
Check – that last “country” is “county” atm,
The rat wants to see coral so it sinks a ship. Ibid Bottlerocket
Well of course Amanda Knox doesn’t “owe” Trump her vote. But my god what a cry baby. She volunteered to the world in a political statement that she opposed Trump and now cries like a baby that she is held responsible for what she has said. Suck it up!! This is what happens when you take a political stand. I think ms Knox got a raw deal in Italy by an over zealous prosecutor and a legal system that is slanted in favor of over zealous prosecutors. I also think Ms Knox knew quite well that her choice to go public about her vote would make her look bad. One wonders why she didn’t simply keep her mouth shut.
#3: “But Trump claimed the exact opposite in the Central Park Five case, calling for the death penalty even though the accused teens’ rape convictions rested solely on coerced false confessions. Even now he views them as guilty, years after they were exonerated based on DNA evidence.”
This is so wrong in so many ways.
Read what the liberal New York Times has to say on the results of a full investigation after the 2002 DNA evidence that Amanda Knox references.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/28/nyregion/boys-guilt-likely-in-rape-of-jogger-police-panel-says.html
First paragraph:
“A panel commissioned by the New York City Police Department concluded yesterday that there was no misconduct in the 1989 investigation of the Central Park jogger case, and said that five Harlem men whose convictions were thrown out by a judge last month had ”most likely” participated in the beating and rape of the jogger.”
There was no evidence that the confessions were coerced in any way. From the same NYT article:
“It said investigators followed rules requiring parents or other relatives to sit in on interviews, adding that Mr. Morgenthau and the original trial judge, Thomas B. Galligan, concurred that there was no evidence that the confessions had been coerced or obtained through trickery, deception or threats of physical force.”
There were also blonde hair fibers on two of the Central Park Five’s clothing and blood/semen on most of the five. In 1989, they weren’t practicing modern DNA analysis to get a more high precision forensic match and most samples weren’t well preserved to do DNA analysis at later dates.
Also the Central Park Five were not legally “exonerated”, their convictions were legally “vacated”. The first means there was actual evidence of innocence. The second simply means that the convictions were set aside.
More here:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/michael-f-armstrong-persistent-myths-in-the-central-park-jogger-case-1406674229
http://www.dailywire.com/news/9788/7-things-you-need-know-about-central-park-jogger-aaron-bandler
to refegriator.
“do you think thunder should have taken it a little easier on Ben?
A panel commissioned by the New York City Police Department
Totally an objective party, I’m sure.
@Hazel Meade: Maybe the police were lying, maybe the courts were dishonest, and maybe the 2002-2003 investigation panel was also lying. OK. Or maybe the counter movement is lying, Ken Burns’s famous documentary was dishonest, the liberal op-eds are skewing the story for personal or political reasons, and Bill De Blasio’s decision to push for a $41 million city settlement was based on his personal politics. Bill de Blasio simply had to tell the city to agree to the settlement. He didn’t have to present evidence or convince judges of innocence, he merely had to get his staff to agree to the payout.
The only trial on this issue found the Central Park Five guilty. There was no retrial on the issue. No court ever found them innocent.
I read recent articles like this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/opinion/why-trump-doubled-down-on-the-central-park-five.html
It is completely outrageous. To pick one example, it says, “The five were in the park that night, but they maintain that they did not participate in other attacks, and there is no evidence that they did.”
From the earlier NTY article, even the “Manhattan district attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, that recommended dismissal of the convictions of the five men” … ” said a fresh look at the confessions and a reconstruction of events that night suggested that the youths could not have raped the jogger because they were elsewhere in the park, assaulting other victims.”
So, even the lead lawyer who argued for vacating the convictions was convinced that the men were assaulting other victims. Also, members of the Central Park Five’s families also later agreed that the men were engaged in various assaults. Also, there was various blood and hair fiber evidence although they didn’t practice modern DNA analysis back in 1989.
BTW, I believe that the usage of the word “rape” may be confused. I believe that legally, if a perp mugs a victim, leaves the victim injured, and other men engage in nonconsensual sexual intercourse, the first perp is legally guilty of rape even though he didn’t engage in sexual activity.
Turns out I have an acoustic mole. I don’t recall where I saw the blurb (here? if not, it should have been!) about the MSU laminate which could act as either a speaker or a microphone that they built into a cloth flag. It played the Trojan’s fighting song (tinny but recognizable) now, THERE’s an innovation that’s more than a stupid spin of old ideas. http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2017/how-scientists-turned-a-flag-into-a-loudspeaker/
Spartans! LOL!!
Trojans takes us in a whole different direction as far as entertainment…
Vibrating trojans?
Color if you get dizzy from spinning around.