Here’s an interesting video with our public genius and prodigy, Jordan Peterson (it’s only 4-1/2 minutes):
I’m sure that he’s right that aggressive women are more limited violence-wise on how they act and so they tend to inflict damage by reputation destruction, gossip, and innuendo. Men do the same things but they have better recourse to violence and so they include that in their bag of tricks and often threaten or use violence as their outlet for aggression.
The point of this post is to make the case that politics in recent decades has become highly feminized, hasn’t it? Aggressive leftists do this same thing, too. They use these exact tactics in dealing with all the politicians and intellectuals. Obama epitomizes this in that he’s so effete if not effeminate but actually very aggressive and cold-blooded.
I’ve always said that candidate Trump used the tactics of the left against his Republican opponents and then again in the general election against Hillary. He turned their own tables on the left. Scott Adams yesterday pointed out that the original use of the Fake News meme was to attack Trump (I forget by whom). Adams then described how Trump just reached out and took this gun from them and aimed it back at them. His political jiu-jitsu is very competent.
I was talking on the telecon the other day and one of the participants knew Jeff Sessions from his days in Alabama and he told us that Sessions was known as the silent assassin. If that’s male aggression then I hope we see some of that here pretty soon.
BTW, I sure can’t figure out why Trump disparages Sessions so much (it happened again today) without firing him. He should have done it last year.
John Yoo says that Sessions may have done Trump a favor by recusing himself but this makes no sense unless Yoo thinks that Sessions would have 1) appointed a special counsel (this seems very doubtful) and 2) if he did he wouldn’t have appointed a scumbag like Mueller. I really wonder about Yoo sometimes.
I am not saying that this being the 947th published post here that the site will blow up when the site reaches 1000 published. I am not saying also that the programmer decided that there was no need to test for this. I am not saying that we are selling R1K tee shirts in the Ratburger gift shop either for 2 for $20 and 1 for $10.01. I am not blaming John for not seeing the inevitable. He assured me there was no need since there would be so few posts here. I am not telling you to stop posting to avert R1K either.
I only recently jumped on the VR (Virtual Reality) bandwagon by purchase of a cheap Gear VR headset that uses my smartphone for rudimentary VR. It has convinced me of the tech’s future.
The first thing I did was explore via the VISO Places app. It is essentially Google Earth for VR. I can name any place in the world or any street in the US and suddenly I’m there, free to look in any direction. I have seen Tokyo, Vegas, and ancient ruins. I retraced my steps from a trip to Ireland 20 years ago. I visited some old family houses and saw the changes the new owners have made in recent years. Fascinating, with endless possibilities!
Next, I experimented with a handful of interactive experiences. Time Machine VR and Ocean Rift (demo) offered a sense of scale as aquatic dinosaurs swam by or a great white approached a diving cage. Star Wars: Droid Repair Bay showed what it’s like to interact with vividly detailed and well animated characters in a virtual environment. SketchFab let me view animated 3D models from many angles.
But my favorite step into the world of VR has been joining the development side. Though I am still learning how to avoid skews and errors, Kuula’s 360 image sharing service and Microsoft’s ICE (Image Composite Editor) or Hugin stitcher software have enabled me to craft my own virtual reality scenes by combining screenshots from video games. These past two weeks, I have produced spherical VR images for ancient Alexandria and Memphis in Egypt during the Roman occupation, for Minas Morgul and other settings in Tolkien’s Middle Earth, for a cartoonish land of pirates, and the Himalayas of Nepal. With a VR headset, anyone can step into these settings and look all around in wonder. Here is my growing collection of VR scenes:
Not every game is amenable to creation of these VR translations. I have so far failed to translate the beautiful environments of For Honor and Star Wars: Battlefront. And I have yet to attempt VR translation with real photography, though it is practiced by many others (realtors, foremost). But this has become a rewarding hobby.
Prime Minister Lord Halifax tried again to tamp down wild speculation and unfounded rumors about what has been going on at the docklands and military aerodromes all around southern England. Though there have been some reports of bombs hitting London and some military bases the PM says that the extent of the damage is overblown.
In order to control the yellow journalists and anti-government elements, he has put the country under lockdown so that no reporters are allowed to travel into any places that are rumored to be damaged by bombs. No pictures are allowed because this just causes needless panic in other parts of the country.
Just this morning Lord Halifax stated, “Everyone, please just consult your newspapers and listen to the wireless and you will see that business is going on normally and that there is nothing to be concerned about.”
The PM has taken some flak recently about his decision to withdraw from the previous September’s declaration of war against Germany. He sarcastically refers to that whole episode as a Phoney War and that he wanted no part of it.
Meanwhile, the weather has been just beautiful and people everywhere are enjoying their summer outings.
Hope you all enjoy the following as much as I did. It reminds one of the perpetual arrogance of ignorance saluted by the Progressives, and at the same time, is educational. A two-fer Thursday! I have included the entire article for your reading pleasure.
Teacher Who Corrected Trump’s Grammar In Viral CNN, NYT Story Got Lots of Stuff Wrong
The retired English teacher who “corrected” a now-viral letter from President Donald J. Trump and who then returned the “corrected” letter to the White House could perhaps use some schooling on the way the law works. In correcting Trump’s letter, the teacher marked something incorrect which was actually correct — legally speaking. (While we’re at it, the grammatical errors weren’t really errors, either; indeed, the letter was more correct than the teacher thinks.)
The teacher, Yvonne Mason, received the letter from the Trump White House in response to a letter she sent to President Trump. Her original letter raised concerns about the Parkland, Florida school shooting and asked President Trump to visit the families of those who died in the massacre. Perturbed by what she claimed was sloppy grammar in the rare return letter from the president, she posted her “corrected” letter to Facebook. It initially made the pages of her local paper, then the New York Times. She appeared on CNN on Monday to continue her jabs. There, she said the letter deserved a grade of “D.” She also opined that while the letter was probably written by staffers, the president signed it. (Has she ever heard of Autopen?) (WATCH the interview here.)
Here is the legal issue we noticed: in his letter to the teacher, President Trump references a number of laws which he seeks to change or which he did change in response to the Parkland shooting. He also references a “rule.” Confused, the teacher circled “rule,” put a question mark in the margin, and said, “explain ‘rule.’”
That sound you just heard is me slamming my head against the desk at which I’m sitting.
There is a hierarchy of laws under the American system of government. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It sets forth three branches of government: executive (which enforces the laws); legislative (which writes the laws); and judicial (which interprets the laws). Here’s the thing: the branches each basically write their own “laws” which play off of one another. So, really, there is more than one type of “law.” The president’s letter accurately notes this. The teacher appears to be confused by it.
Perhaps the English teacher could benefit by calling up her social studies buddies for a primer. When most people reference federal “law,” what they really mean are the statutes written by the Senate and the House of Representatives. Executive branch agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Labor, etc., etc., etc., which are constitutionally attached to the president, have “rulemaking authority” to write “rules” which expound upon the more rough parameters set forth by the legislature in statutes. Lest we forget, the hierarchy, in descending order, contains all sorts of laws: the Constitution, statutes, administrative rules (which have the “force of law”), and judicial opinions (which — oh no! — have their own hierarchy, too!). What about the opinions of administrative law judges who work for executive branch agencies authorized by congress but constitutionally attached to the president? Gosh, this gets complicated, and we haven’t even gotten into city ordinances or state statutes.
Trump’s letter accurately differentiates between “rules” and “laws.” The teacher’s question mark response suggests either (1) she just doesn’t get the concepts I just painstakingly explained; or (2) if she does get it, she wants her “student” — President Trump — to explain it to her solely to prove that he knows it as well. The second tactic is ridiculous given the Trump letter’s careful differentiation between the two. He gets it. My guess is that she does not.
Thus concludes the lesson about legal hierarchy. There’s more, which I’ll address briefly.
The teacher told CNN she was most “appalled” by the “random capitalization of words that typically aren’t capitalized.” In the letter, the word “Nation” is frequently capitalized. When CNN pointed Ms. Mason to the fact that the government has its own stylebook, Ms. Mason botched the answer by flipping the script and pretty much claiming she was the authority: “My philosophy as a teacher is if we aren’t teaching this in the classroom, then why are we using it in a stylebook.” She then went on to entirely misinterpret the rule being applied.
Under the Government Printing Office’s stylebook, available here, Rule 3.20 on page 32 and the example on page 68 clearly state that “Nation” is capitalized in federal publications where the word is used as a replacement for the proper name of the country.
Rather than take the time to pull out her own stylebook(s), Ms. Mason confused that rule with the one for proper nouns, which in the stylebook is a totally different rule, and accused Trump of engaging in a “grammatical tragedy of the commons” where people start “randomly deciding which words are proper nouns and which aren’t.”
The teacher said her dream was “clear communication.”
“Communicate clearly what you want, and you’re more likely to get it because language is the currency of power.” (That’s a grammatically-incorrect sentence, Ms. Mason; plus, the stylebook clearly communicates what it wants.)
Hopefully, Ms. Mason taught her students that the rules change depending on the intended vehicle of publication: the MLA, APA, and Chicago Manuals of Style are not the end of the stylebook world. The legal profession uses the Bluebook for citations, the Chicago Manual of Style where the Bluebook is silent, and the Redbook for other grammatical guidance. Reporters use the Associated Press Stylebook. The Government Printing Office has its own stylebook. Guess what? President Barack Obama followed it when he also capitalized words like “Nation” in his own letters (examples are here, here, here, and here). So did Michelle Obama (here). We are not certain whether Ms. Mason plans to spend her retirement correcting the Obamas, too.
Having been schooled by and having worked with both good and bad educators over the years, I am well versed in the sorts of histrionic fits some educators can get themselves into while defending their perceived entitlements to paychecks. If Ms. Mason gives President Trump a “D” on grammar and communication, I give her an “F” on defending her rationale for her judgment.
Aaron Keller is a live, streaming trial host for the Law&Crime Network. He is licensed to practice law in two states and served as a professor of English and communications for several years before joining Law&Crime. Follow him on Twitter: @AKellerLawCrime.
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.
This article on chess and how it is applied politically fascinates me. (Although I take issue with the author’s support of the Dems and their railing against Trump.) But the author’s details about chess were interesting. The analogy is one I find spot on.
As it is true the Dems are indeed using a windmill assault as done in chess, against the “king.” Who in this case happens to be Trump. Of course, Trump needs to simply say, “Stop!”(Something a king cannot do in the real game of chess.)
After all, it has been almost two years of this behavior. And yet so far nothing the Dems have accomplished should allow them to continue their “investigation” — due to the fact that their justification is on such flimsy legal grounds. Their only accomplishments have been the most venal and petty ones – the Mueller probe almost destroying Michael Caputo, the bankruptcy the investigation almost pushed Gen Mike Flynn into, and his indictment over a “lie,” and of course Paul Manaforte. And as it has been pointed out, the Podesta Bros never registered as foreign agents – so if Manaforte is guilty of that, it stands to reason someone should have indicted the Podestas as well.
Now this is their legal argument, the sole argument for the continuing of the investigation: “We need to keep the Mueller investigation on going even though the only reason we were allowed the investigation in the first place was because we lied and said there was evidence.” A first year law student sees through the error of this concept.
Of course now that Trump has Giuliani in on the game, he won’t be encouraged to play the role of the king and say “Stop.” As Giuliani is probably there to see to it that Trump testifies before Mueller or Mueller’s people.
I know it is possible my view of Giuliani is not accepted by some here. But I see him as the sort of Power Broker that Di Feinstein is – playing both sides against each other as long as there is a payoff for such activities during and after the twisted but astute political maneuvering. (Of course, I do hope I am wrong about Giuliani.)
1. Donald Trump: A President Like No Other by Conrad Black and recommended by member Larry Koler.
2. The Trump White House: Changing the Rules of the Game by Ronald Kessler and recommended by Virginia Thomas, wife of the Supreme Court Justice.
I may be a book freak with a particular attraction to historical and presidential biographies, but what surprises me most is that 18 months into his presidency, I will soon own five books on the Donald. I don’t own that many individual books on Washington or Lincoln!
Trump could end up being the greatest promoter of the book industry in history and would that not be a welcome change?
Endless war, corrupt takeovers of legit corporations, the late Eighties early Nineties swindle of the Russian economy, and more.
Sidebar: Does Trump free us from the Big Bankers’ regime? Probably not. But one can hope that when he stated in his campaign pledges how much he hates the Big Banks, that he was not implying he would be creating a First National Bank of Trump.
I heard that the essence of humor is making fun of someone or something. I think being unnecessarily cruel for a laugh is bad. But also I find taking everything so seriously that no one can say the smallest thing for fear of offending is also bad. Where is the balance between the two extremes?
In the recent cause célèbre, I took it as a joke. I took Roseanne Barr was not saying that Valerie Jarrett was an ape, but look like the Kim Hunter character in Planet of the Apes. I don’t understand how this was over the line when W was caricatured like a chimp all the time. Obama had huge ears. Or Condoleezza Rice was depicted with huge lips. Abraham Lincoln was seen as a gorilla. Sure these things are not the nicest of things but have happened for a long time and been part of public life. In no way was this violent like the Kathy Griffin picture with a severed head. (Picture link: http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/_jD15cq53Ell.jpg )
What happens is a joke becomes a serious treatise that must take 5 hours of cable time to parse and feign outrage. “We see from this the following ten things. …” “America needs to move beyond saying things like this.” “Breaking News Flash the Real Reason the Chicken Crossed the Road.”
Why can’t people give back as good as they get? The jokes just about write themselves if you want to pick on Roseanne Barr. Let her keep her job and ridicule her. Use creativity to fire a salvo. Society is a better place when we can civilly joke with one another. (Do you want to hear my latest Richard Easton joke?)
This the second novel in the author’s Hidden Truth series. In the first book we met high schoolers and best friends Pete Burdell and Amit Patel who found, in dusty library books, knowledge apparently discovered by the pioneers of classical electromagnetism (many of whom died young), but which does not figure in modern works, even purported republications of the original sources they had consulted. As they try to sort through the discrepancies, make sense of what they’ve found, and scour sources looking for other apparently suppressed information, they become aware that dark and powerful forces seem bent on keeping this seemingly obscure information hidden. People who dig too deeply have a tendency to turn up dead in suspicious “accidents”, and Amit coins the monicker “EVIL”: the Electromagnetic Villains International League, for their adversaries. Events turn personal and tragic, and Amit and Pete learn tradecraft, how to deal with cops (real and fake), and navigate the legal system with the aid of mentors worthy of a Heinlein story.
This novel finds the pair entering the freshman class at Georgia Tech—they’re on their way to becoming “rambling wrecks”. Unable to pay their way with their own resources, Pete and Amit compete for and win full-ride scholarships funded by the Civic Circle, an organisation they suspect may be in cahoots in some way with EVIL. As a condition of their scholarship, they must take a course, “Introduction to Social Justice Studies” (the “Studies” should be tip-off enough) to become “social justice ambassadors” to the knuckle-walking Tech community.
Pete’s Uncle Ron feared this might be a mistake, but Amit and Pete saw it as a way to burrow from within, starting their own “long march through the institutions”, and, incidentally, having a great deal of fun and, especially for Amit, an aspiring master of Game, meet radical chicks. Once at Tech, it becomes clear that the first battles they must fight relate not to 19th century electrodynamics but the 21st century social justice wars.
Pete’s family name resonates with history and tradition at Tech. In the 1920s, with a duplicate enrollment form in hand, enterprising undergraduates signed up the fictitious “George P. Burdell” for a full course load, submitted his homework, took his exams, and saw him graduate in 1930. Burdell went on to serve in World War II, and was listed on the Board of Directors of Mad magazine. Whenever Georgia Tech alumni gather, it is not uncommon to hear George P. Burdell being paged. Amit and Pete decide the time has come to enlist the school’s most famous alumnus in the battle for its soul, and before long the merry pranksters of FOG—Friends of George—were mocking and disrupting the earnest schemes of the social justice warriors.
Meanwhile, Pete has taken a job as a laboratory assistant and, examining data that shouldn’t be interesting, discovers a new phenomenon which might just tie in with his and Amit’s earlier discoveries. These investigations, as his professor warns, can also be perilous, and before long he and Amit find themselves dealing with three separate secret conspiracies vying for control over the hidden knowledge, which may be much greater and rooted deeper in history than they had imagined. Another enigmatic document by an obscure missionary named Angus MacGuffin (!), who came to a mysterious and violent end in 1940, suggests a unification of the enigmas. And one of the greatest mysteries of twentieth century physics, involving one of its most brilliant figures, may be involved.
This series is a bit of Golden Age science fiction which somehow dropped into the early 21st century. It is a story of mystery, adventure, heroes, and villains, with interesting ideas and technical details which are plausible. The characters are interesting and grow as they are tested and learn from their experiences. And the story is related with a light touch, with plenty of smiles and laughs at the expense of those who richly deserve mockery and scorn. This book is superbly done and a worthy sequel to the first. I eagerly await the next, The Brave and the Bold.
I was delighted to see that Pete made the same discovery about triangles in physics and engineering problems that I made in my first year of engineering school. One of the first things any engineer should learn is to see if there’s an easier way to get the answer out. I’ll be adding “proglodytes”—progressive troglodytes—to my vocabulary.
For a self-published work, there are only a very few copy editing errors. The Kindle edition is free for Kindle Unlimited subscribers. In an “About the Author” section at the end, the author notes:
There’s a growing fraternity of independent, self-published authors busy changing the culture one story at a time with their tales of adventure and heroism. Here are a few of my more recent discoveries.
With the social justice crowd doing their worst to wreck science fiction, the works of any of these authors are a great way to remember why you started reading science fiction in the first place.
Schantz, Hans G. A Rambling Wreck. Huntsville, AL: ÆtherCzar, 2017. ISBN 978-1-5482-0142-5.