"Renaissance Thinking About the Issues of Our Day"
Sven -- Leveling off does not mean there is a cooling trend. You need to look at Prof Mullen's (sp?) work. He was paid a million bucks by the Koch's to disprove global warming. He tried for several years and saw it was hopeless. Of course what I have said is just verbage. He has a chart that shows every time the temp has decreased, leveled off, or slowed is due to other factors, mostly solar activities.
The climate scientists originally predicted the Artic Ice was to disappear in 2100. The last thing I heard was the artic ice is due to disappear this summer.
I thought the defense industries were paying a lot to clean up their damage on US soil.
Thanks all. Once again we meet the medical community and its "expertise," and while there are parts of medicine where they excell and I have found more than a few who are curious continuing learners instead of dogmatic as we explore the issues of recovery I have encountered.
I have found doctors and therapists to be too focused on the points of pain and too eager to medicate rather than help our natural pain responses work. They have rarely appreciated what pain in one's foot tells about what is going on up above and why relieving the pain without dealing with its cause is not helpful. Pete Egoscue's PAIN FREE was the first and best read to refocus my rehab on effective recovery, and I have taught therapists and doctors why it works for a decade or more. After more than a decade of making things worse working out. On advice of doctors.
Others have posted from greater expertise about the botany and that there are pain relieving and ecstatic strains making it hard to generalize from field research on users. What I will say is that the side-effects of pot are minimal, if any, while all the pain relievers I was prescribed can really do some damage over time and with over use. It turns out that numb is often worse than pain if you don't deal with it. Getting numbed up can be the wrong answer, but it can also be the only way when certain conditions are present and in some death processes.
We have a lot to learn from people who have been dying well for a lot longer than our arc of research encompasses. I think opiates have a great role to play, and my personal experience with the morphine drip after back surgery was filled with gratitude. When I wanted to feel and be awake again, it lost its appeal. Weed, a muscle relaxant, has had a positive role to play in my getting better. It has this nice effect of not dulling the mind even if it can introduce "the zone" to the unprepared.
Those who do not want to relax the brain probably do not want to improvise music either. If you experience fear and cannot transcend it, or if the alienation trumps the connecting, don't torture yourself, but you might want to reflect on what you have found in a relaxed, personal manner.
Personally, I found opium soaked hash to be something that could help with chronic pain without vegetablizing the user.
MMmm -- Interesting that we have been living under reaganomics for 32 years since you mention your brother working for 31 years.
MMmm -- I think your 100% is high. I think the stat that only 17% of the people know that the repugs run the House implies that the 100% should be 83%.
Drbjmn, we don't need to drag out this little argument any further. Suffice it to say, at least for my part, I cannot see any justification for a business owner's throwing the application of a respectable person in the trash without reading it and giving the applicant a chance, especially not for reasons of race. It's illegal to do so, anyway, and to make such discrimination illegal is not "confrontation" or "yelling at" racists. It's granting equality and justice to citizens.
I simply do not see your "understanding" of the rationale for such job discrimination as valid.
You missunderstood the assertion. It was about asserting white guilt would better addressed by helping whites, even you, understand white privilege, rather than the "angry black man" approach. It had nothing to do with suggesting promoting total equality for all races should be somehow stifled, so as not to progress too fast.
We have black and hispanics in our family, and I love them all.
I don't feel sorry for people that are uncomfortable around minorities. I was just saying i know there are people that would consider that, with regards to their business.
"Shame the assertion"...Shame your pie hole!
I doubt I misunderstood anything. Here's your comment:
Yes, racism exists in America.
unfortunately, if you don't take it slow, they won't take it all. I know that for a FACT. As I'm sure many do.
What is racism if not a cultural condition making for the absence of equality, justice and fairness for the Other? As written, your suggestion "they won't take it at all," if change doesn't come slowly, seems pretty clear: Don't rub it in white people's faces. You said nothing about "helping whites understand white privilege," whatever that means.
I shamed the assertion as written, not YOU, drbjmn. Perhaps you should watch your "pie hole"— that is, learn to write with more clarity, then try addressing me without the insulting directives.
OK, it was clear to me i was referring to white guilt. But I see how it wasn't clear.
The "pie hole" was in frustration, not insult. I forgot the smily face. If the way I use, and mean pie hole, were an actual insult, my wife would have stabbed me in my sleep years ago.
Well, perhaps because I've recognized your kidding tone previously, you thought I would this time as well. The thing is, though we haven't been hostile here, this hasn't been such a good-natured exchange. Thus, for you to tell me to shut my "pie hole" doesn't come across as fun.
Now, I believe most of the confusion here, between us, is evident from your "whatever that means."
I don't consider white "guilt", and white "privilege" to be the same thing. Do you?
No, not at all.
To me, white "guilt" is about black people trying, angrily, to make white people feel guilty about being white. I'm not saying black people don't have a right to be angry. I'm just saying confrontation is counterproductive.The purpose, as i see it, of white guilt, is to facilitate an understanding of white privilege.
White guilt is sometimes merely conscience— an honest feeling of remorse and recognition for belonging to a race that brought such terror, suffering and and oppression to people of other races. It's not necessarily a neurotic thing, and it certainly isn't about "black people trying, angrily, to make white people feel guilty about being white." Blacks don't own it; whites do.
When it's neurotic is when it becomes an obsequious or unnaturally deferential posture toward blacks, or a patronizing over-appreciation and kissing-up that's clearly phony and not demanded by anybody or anything but a self-conscious awareness of race that is racist in itself.
White privilege is so vast it's impossible to count the ways. It's everything from being visible to clerks in a department store, while black customers get ignored, to police ignoring of powder cocaine users in white suburbs, while they focus on crack cocaine users; it's nobody in a white community getting pulled over for driving-while-white, while it's stop & frisk in black communities; it's inner city public schools without computers, while upscale, white suburbs have them aplenty. And that's just the small stuff. Need I list it all?
I'm sure my list, the one gleaned second-hand, could never be as long or as passionately expressed as the one gleaned in a long life living as non-white under white privilege.
White privilege, is about acknowledging benefits one, or those like them, has, or can have, just because they are white, that others don't, or can't , simply because of their color. And of course acknowledgement of that, should involve a substantial amount of guilt.
But it's not about an idividual white person. Confrontation makes people defensive, and defensive people personalize the attack ,and are less likely to get the intended message,imo.
But a concerted effort, of all people, to discuss, and understand white privilege, would speed things up towards greater equality, imo.
I feel rambly now, so I'll stop here, and try to gather my thoughts be fore i make any more comments about this.
In the meantime, shut your pie hole.:)
I'm not your wife. And don't you forget it. ;-)
Yes I have read the thread.
Even if they knew the dangers of smoking the average human with a high school education would also know the dangers, but then again they were not forced to buy the product or forced to use the product. Lying to the public happens all day long just look to the government for examples.
Corporations are not allowed to lie to the public there are laws against false advertisement.
Why must the government protect organized labor? They should protect all labor equally I believe they do a pretty good job of protecting the worker at large, organized or unorganized.
Intellectual property rights should belong to the inventor or the corporation that hired the inventor to produce the product for them. They should be allowed to receive the benefit from the invention for a specific amount of time.
Investors have to pick and choose where they invest their money; government regulations can make it more profitable but can also drive the business out of business.
I notice you did not answer my questions;
Exactly how are the corporations ripping us off?
Exactly how are the corporations interfering with the political process?
One new question would the laws removing corporations from the political process apply to labor unions as well?
Pal -- If there is anything I would take seriously, it would be a "war mongering punk."
Greg Palast had an interesting article about the gold standard sometime in the past year. He described a key motive for the revolutionary war was England trying to force the gold standard on us. As Thom as often said the gold standard prohibits growth.
Gary R -- How about repealing every law passed from 1979 to 2009 (not including 2009)?
MMmmmNachos: Wow! Thai, German, French, and Spanish...and English too! I've spent years trying to learn Arabic, reading, speaking, and understanding the spoken language...and although I can read the script, and know a lot of words, it's still hard to entirely understand a conversation...there are a number of dialects. I can pick out words here and there but it is not so easy. I have used some of the well known language courses including Rosetta Stone, FSI, and a bunch of on-line courses, even Learn Arabic With Maha...she's cute. Anyway, I drift back into it and out again from time to time. It would be better if I was totally immersed back into Saudi Arabia or any of the other Arabic speaking countries again. But, I think I had just better hang on to my head a little while longer. I cheated death once! Not anxious to do it again!
Of course, now that I'm back in the states, I might get mugged and murdered by some punk who needs drug money. That's something I didn't have to worry about over in Saudi Arabia. Although, some people (expats and Saudis) did smuggle in some drugs and alcohol...but mostly, they just made wine from grape-juice. Maybe if we had public beheadings and behandings or stoning to death here in the states we would have a lot less street and home invasion violence. But, we'd also have arenas full of stoned women and beheaded men for adultery and huge piles of hands for theft. Somehow, I'm glad I didn't get on those yellow school buses to downtown Dammam to witness the festivities!
Short-term political calculations are rarely good long-term strategies, and what bites on on one's ass has this generational dynamic expressed so well by the Sun King as "apres moi, le deluge," Or, stick it on the kid's bill.
This misunderstanding of debt as a bill for our kids is part of the mistaken path taken by the Republicans in their reactionary exploitative business plan. They rode the fading arcs of racism and homophobia in the hopes that irrational anger could be misdirected anywhere but at the powerful. Like crack, it beat honesty in rehab until it didn't anymore. Then it just made everything worse.
Being on the wrong side of history, humanity and morality is a tough thing, and I hope they give up trying to defend it as soon as they can.
No offense Doctor but in my long experience of being treated by the medical community, and I might add as having been a nursing home CNA, it is my experience that doctors have a very narrow view in this regard because they have been subjected to the official AMA platform which emphasizes and relies heavily on prescription medication over alternative kinds of care.
I don't think the issue is whether or not cannabis is "superior" but whether it can offer a satisfactory and safer alternative in some cases. I don't use cannabis now (but won't rule it out for the future as I qualify for a prescription) but I can tell you that as a young man I smoked pot regularly and when I decided to stop I just put it down. Tobacco on the other hand, a perfectly legal substance for adults to use in any way that they choose, was a monster to give up. It took years to get that monkey off my back. And if ever there was a common gateway drug I'd suggest that it's tobacco.
jproctor67: I agree with most of what you have said and I agree that Obama, at first, seemed to win more friends and influenced enemies because they all thought Obama was going to be different. He WAS different from that bumbling idiot, Bush (who deserves to be in prison, at least), but I gave up on Obama shortly after he started appointing all of those Clinton/Bush flunkies to be his advisers who caused the economic crises in 2008.
Yes, I voted for Obama the first time but certainly not the second time. And since Obama's regime did not readily cease our criminal actions in the Middle East or the torture chambers the US had in Iraq and Gitmo, since he immediate gave in to the HealthScare/Pharma/Insurance companies by taking Single Payer off the table without so much as a fuss...in fact, I think he gladly did it. I am certainly glad I didn't vote for him the second time. Since the heroes Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden and the other whistleblowers like Thomas Drake, and others, were wrongly treated so badly an unjustly by the Obama administration...and since the US spy agencies has gotten to such a dystopian nightmare...and since there has really not been any useful reverse in laws and enforcement against the corruption of banksters and Wall Street...there is really no good reason to think of Obama as a good President. He was and is merely the wolf in sheep's clothing that played us all for suckers. He was and is just another puppet for the ruling elite who will continue to screw us all.
Next time, vote for the candidate who is least funded by the ruling elite...and that leaves out both the Democrats and the Republicans. If we vote in an outsider, it will send a strong and chilling message to the wealthy overlords that their money will do them no good any longer. It happened in California...Brown won against his filthy rich opponents Fiorina and Whitman. Even if you think you will risk getting the Republicans back into power (yeah, right, like they aren't already in power!), if you continue to play the ruling elite's game of choosing between two parties that they own, we will continue to suffer the exploitation and indignity by the ruling elite.
Besides, wouldn't you rather the revolution took place during a Republican regime rather than a Democrat one? If you merely vote Democrat again...they'll just keep you strung along with false hope and excuses...that's what they do. With a Republican in office... that just might trigger what I think is inevitable...and necessary. History has shown that only revolution really changes things for the better for those who have been unfairly exploited and abused. Without it, they'll never fear and respect us, they'll just continue to screw us. But, if we're lucky, if the majority of voters choose a third party candidate, against all monied-leveraged odds, it will be a real revolution very much desired...all without people having to take to the streets.
Winning friends and influencing enemies is not the ruling elite's game anyway. They are greedy for total world conquest in our image...total subjugation. They need lots of enemies to keep USians constantly afraid so that we will continue to rely on our Military/Industrial/Spying/Corrupt-Congressional complex to keep us safe from the "bad guys". They don't want us to realize that the real "bad guys" are the beguilers and tricksters who created these "enemies" in the first place. It wasn't 19 Muslim hijackers nor OBL! They didn't start the backstabbing and threats ...even way back when "terrorist" activities happened long before 9/11 around the world... it was mostly all instigated by xenophobic, profit mongering bullies from the west who have throughout their history created "false flags" to fool their obtuse citizens into supporting their criminal deeds.
9/11 was merely Operation Northwoods morphed into PNAC's "new Pearl Harbor" that scared and bullied everyone to fall into line and follow the real traitors in our midst who engineered it all.
Look where we are today, a failing economy. The world, while at first-light of the Obama era, won a few praises from the world... full of hope and expectations of real "change we can believe in", has now dwindled to practically the whole world hating us (hating our ruling elite, anyway...they probably just pity the rest of us). They are all moving away from the dollar, treating the US as a pariah nation. Why not, the US has scorned other nations, especially China, for spying on us when it was mostly the other way around. And I wouldn't put it past the US spy agencies to have originated the hacking incidences against the US that they claim came from China. They can easily make it look like China was spying on us when, in fact, it was the US spying agencies initializing the attacks (cyber-warfare false flags). In case you don't know it already..the war is largely against the American people as much as it is against everyone else in the world.
Read the book "Behold A Pale Farce--Cyberwar, Threat Inflation, & the Malware Industrial Complex" by Bill Blunden and Violet Cheung.
If you think you are safe with very well known Security Company's firewalls, virus, trojan, and rootkit software then you are being tricked. And every time you do an "security upgrade"...like monthly 2nd Tuesday Microsoft security upgrades...how do you know that they aren't just adding more spyware for the NSA? How do you know that they didn't do this a long time ago...even built into the Operating System? The NSA has put the heavy on these companies to make it easy for them to even crack your encrypted emails or files..install back-doors...install spyware...all so they can spy on us. And if they can do it...the hackers can use those exploits too...they too can use those weaknesses to spy on you...wipe out your bank accounts through identity theft. The profit is in keeping you forever afraid and willing to shell out your money for "fake protection"....it may keep out the script kiddies but not the real hackers. It is an illusion! And they profit very well from our gullibility.
Any and all arguments FOR oil, coal and natural gas to the detriment of renewable energy are shortsighted at best and suicidal at worst. Clearly we use too much energy and petro is readily available, but to not begin serious changes to our mindset that views petro as a stop gap as opposed to the neverending cheap energy source is beyond foolish.
Petroleum is hardly a spec of fly shit in the pepper when it comes to the speculation and financial manipulation argument anyhow. The financial game has always been rigged for those with enough money to work it, but today it is on steroids. The well-monied used to have to actually invest in productivity or take part in improving productivity to make significant financial gains, but today productivity doesn't even enter into the equation, leaving those on the lower end of the economic ladder without the jobs that used to be required for productivity.
Why would somebody want to buy a factory, hire employees and purchase equipment in order to get rich when they can just shuffle some paper around instead. If America was so bold to elect Bernie and he had some congressional backing which allowed us to clamp down on this easy money with no productivity, would't all of these financial leeches just relocate to other parts of the world? Does America possess anything that would keep true productivity oriented people here or do they necessarily fly the coop as well?
We all know how the argument goes ..... the greedy, lazy, stupid American workers are not productive enough and the poor business owners are taxed too much, of course they have to go overseas to have any chance to make a buck, right? How do we chase off the unproductive financial slackers while keeping the brightest and most productive? It can't be that hard ..... just change a few laws, trade policies and tax codes while enforcing many good unenforced laws that already exist. One good president with a willing congress is all it takes.
Might I point out that what you posted was not an "analysis" but an opinion piece as opposed to pieces about real world consequences unfolding as a result of five conservative judges choosing to treat an abstract and arbitrary notion like religion as a business concern. Personally I blame Obama, he was a dumbass for thinking that providing a religious exemption to nonprofits would mollify right wing zealots and the corporatists who are using them as stooges to stymie regulations.
Thom, I would like to remind you of a suggestion one of your callers recently made. Call the midterm election the "congressional elections." With the recent lowest-ever ratings of congress, maybe the new term "congressional elections" could increase turnout if folks thought they could vote against status quo. Unfortunately, people are more likely to come out to vote against than to vote for. If we could get Obama out of the Oval Office to campaign against a "do nothing congress" we might reduce the probability of a Republican takeover of the entire legislative branch. If the Republicans achieve a takeover then Obama can spend the last two years of his administration on a beach in Hawaii for all the good he would do sitting at a desk in Washington watching his impeachment successfully proceed.
I think we're living in a Nevil Shute novel in one way or another - or in all ways combined, gathering to a "perfect storm", as it were.
And by the way, the biggest opium dealers in the world are Glaxo and Johnson & Johnson, which cultivate 10,000 hectares of opium poppies, each. In Tasmania, not Afghanistan.
Now what if we just bought the Afghan's opium from them legally?
Pal -- I like what you say so much about 9/11, I hate myself when I suggest seeds of doubt. However, I can't stop myself. Do you know what was the composition of the explosives used to blow up the WTC in 1994? Next seed, if CNN and BBC were involved in the conspiracy, it is beyond my belief that any beauracy that large could have carried out the elaborate schemes that you describe.
I believe that people should only vote for the politicians who receive the least bribes (ie: contributions from big business) because big business will obviously "own" them and the politicians will turn their backs toward the people who voted for them...eventually. Let's see now...just how much was it that Obama received compared to the other candidates? Obama raised more. Although one could argue that more funds for Romney came from the wealthier donors but both Dem and Repub candidates still got lots of money from the wealthier donors compared to what the other candidates got. So both Dem/Repub candidates got huge donations from the wealthiest donors (ie: they are both owned by the wealthiest donors). And that is obvious when you see how Obama (the betrayer) acted after he took office...even after the first time. Vote for the little guy/gal who isn't heavily funded. If you really want to make an impact and show that money will no longer buy candidates...vote for them instead of the heavily funded candidates. That would be the simplest and least risky...certainly a lot less risky and dangerous than an all out revolution....which I believe may one day happen if things don't change.
You don't need to have a "movement" to take the money out of politics if everyone simply voted for the candidate who received the least amount of money from big business. Let them waste their money!
I'm all for supporting a "movement to take money out of politics but if you can't get voters to see the futility of voting for the candidate that gets large contributions from big business then I doubt anything else will work. Worth a try, though.
I wonder when "once a decade" will become "once a year"? It sure looks like that's where we're headed.
I think nuclear powered electrical generation plants could be a lot safer but it will never happen as long as there is profit to be made and without proper independent overseers that aren't bribable... which leaves out the politicians..they've proven their corruptibility. What politician, other than Bernie Sanders and a few others, will risk losing their next election by giving the finger to big business, big energy, big pharma, etc.?
Now if there was an enforceable law banning "revolving doors" between government and private sectors whereby no politician could ever benefit from the private sector, ever, and that they could never receive any kind of compensation in or out of office by their position in the government then they might be to regulate the nuclear power plants safely.
The capitalists will cut corners and cheat on safety...that's just what they do... They'll locate nuclear plants in unsafe locations like on or near earthquake fault zones, rivers that have been known to flood, and near ocean/land boundaries that are subject to hurricanes and tidal waves....all because it serves their profit motives.
I know it takes a lot of water to properly control nuclear power plants, and it would cost a lot to not locate plants near bodies of water...so, large bodies of water need to be created and located in locations that would be able to isolate and contain leakages into the aquifers and natural ground level bodies of water. It would be very expensive, but if we are going to use nuclear electrical power generation, it has to be made as safe as possible and make the profit motive take a backseat to safety.
I'd much prefer the safer forms of energy conversion like wind, solar, wave, and geothermal all of which are far safer than nuclear.
Hey ulTRAX, we all work this stuff out as we can our own way, so I won't try to argue with what you feel or how you state where you are other than to say that I think you might want to rethink some of the Rightie memes that you accept on their face. Particularly, your concern about the "nanny state" misses the reality that this is how to end welfare as we know it and invest in people up front in order to have them educated, healthy and debt-free when they begin their own vocational and personal lives as developing adults.
But, I think you do help the wonkier and more radical appreciate that a lot of people want to belong to the Rodney King Party where we just get along with one another. They don't want to have to know the sociology of power and the anthropological history of racism and social disadvantage, they just want things to be fair and just for everyone. They, I believe, do not argue much with the words of the Pledge of Allegiance and don't really care to get lost in Constitutionalist arguments about fine points. They would like to see an end to mass shootings and public intimidation--stand your ground stuff.
Most of them want to disarm the cops when you get them to think about it. They are not really fans of empire and have deep misgivings about all this War on Terrorism and why we keep having to get involved in local squabbles on the other side of the world.
We all prefer creatively involved and productive people to drones, but we love music and art, so how we define work might need an update and redo. We also could find a human way to enjoy the labor-saving effects of technology instead of worrying about people who will become nothing when their jobs go away. How could that be? They are human beings, not "workers." Which reality should yield to the other?
The larger point is that it all falls apart when you pull one of many strings out of the ideological yarnball. The idea that trading is investing in wealth creation is one myth that leads to seeing a larger structural web of mythogies and other misleading 'truths' that have convinced people that fluff has substance and that reality does not really work the way they see it with their lying eyes.
Others have made the structural and institutional argument for wealth always consolidating its dynastic grip on power and dominance. The idea that "Capitalism" is the partner of democracy and the natural expression of freedom in our economic lives is grossly misconstrued. What "Capitalism" is begins the problem as we have it confused with personally owned businesses, farms and trades where "capitalism" involves investments in the businesses of others to make money in trading rather than to provide capital formation and longitude for new business development or innovations and expansions. "Fast Money" belongs as a side bet in the Casino where it has no effect on the Real Economy or the metrics of money in the real world.
Those who justify this Neocon economic world range from predators to intellectuals who may be academic gadflies or corporate pimps. There are academics who have grown up with a chip on their shoulder against liberals and who have devoted themselves to finding the best sophistry around to make a case that cannot really be made without exposing themselves.
Even clearer is the abysmal record of failed policies in economic and political life. In a plutocracy, failing upwards pays off and telling the truth about power can bring unemployment and private contracting to what work you can find. It would amaze me were I not aware of the money in academia to find so many shills for corporate among its groves. But, this is not new, nor can I really find a time when the academy was not highly constrained by the official powers and dogmas of its age. It is paid employment, and that is the bottom line in plutocracy.
Was there anybody that wasn't blown away when this artist hit the scene?
50+ minutes from the Montreux Jazz Festival circa 1884. Enjoy while perusing the the threads elsewhere on the forum: