The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions." --American Statesman Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

Friday, August 16, 2019

Manners and conversations.

I am working on a blogpost or trying to organize my random thoughts processes into a coherent blogpost, but that will come.  Anyway I ran across this posting from "Art Of Manliness".  I remembered seeing something several years ago at a restaurant, there were 4 teenagers around a table at a popular local restaurant and all of them instead of spending time with each other, they all were on their phones, and people wonder where the art of Social interaction went.  Old NFO commented more recently of the same thing. 

When people no longer know how to act with each other in realspace, then you wonder why the world is getting cruder.  I remembered reading the words of Lazerus Long" and I have that same book somewhere.  Well anyway I recall something that was written "Manners is the lubricant that allows the interaction of human beings without blood being drawn".  People have forgotten how to be polite.  When you can spew vitreol all over social media, one forgets that real life don't work that way and people get upset and pissy. 

Much has been said as to how a technology-driven reduction in our face-to-face interactions may be negatively impacting our physical health and mental happiness. In the absence of strong relationships, anxiety, depression, and likely certain diseases as well, have been on the upswing.
While the negative psychological and physiological effects which result from the loss of face-to-face conversation are worthy of continual cognizance, this trend begets another deleterious impact which goes overlooked: a diminishment in character.
While we often think of character as something that’s exclusively forged, if not in big crises, than in decisions with clear moral weight, it can in fact be developed in any of our ordinary, everyday activities. How we carry out everything we do, radiates effects both outwardly and inwardly. While this is true of any habit, it is particularly true of conversation. In fact, given its daily accessibility, its repeatability — allowing for practice, correction, refinement — and the numerous, varied virtues it calls upon and exercises, face-to-face conversation constitutes one of the best ways of training the human soul.
Below we illuminate the many qualities of character that can be built through active, effortful participation in conversation:


The behaviors we must summon to engage in a conversation happen with so little conscious awareness, that it can be easy to miss the extent to which they require strenuous self-control.
We must check our body language and facial expressions, demonstrating interest and friendliness, and avoiding eye rolls, inappropriate looks of shock, disgust, or boredom, and postures that read as closed-off, nervous, or defensive. We must watch what we say, abstaining from non-sequiturs, excessive negativity and complaints, gossip, and inadvertent insults to the person to whom we are speaking and those they know. We must keep ourselves from saying things that are thoughtless, whether literally, as in devoid of meaning, or in the sense of wounding another’s feelings. We must listen attentively and react appropriately to what the other person says, trying to hit the right tone and content in our responses. We must choose our words carefully, articulate them well, and talk neither too fast nor too slow.
All in all, a good conversation takes a tremendous amount of mental discipline! (Which is why, whether you’re an introvert or an extrovert, you can feel quite fatigued after a night of socializing.) On the path to self-mastery, face-to-face dialogues are an underrated tool.


Conversation is a singular exercise in being present in the moment. To engage it fully you must shut down the distractions of the outside world and disentangle from devices. To listen attentively to another, you must continually bring the mind back to the present each time it wanders. You must commit to the idea that there is nowhere else you’d rather be, than right there, right then, with this other person.

A Bias Towards Effort and Action

It’s easy to be the person who waits for others to make the first move, who hopes someone else will come up and start talking to him. It’s easy too, especially in a group, to hang back, only half-listening, and let others do the conversational heavy lifting — to let others introduce all the topics and think of questions to ask.
We sometimes excuse these passive behaviors as shyness or introversion, when really they are the hallmarks of passivity or outright laziness. E.g., we say we can’t remember what someone told us about X because we have a poor memory, when in truth, we actually didn’t listen well enough.
A good conversationalist isn’t idle or inert; he’s an initiative taker. He realizes that like any other worthwhile endeavor, conversation takes work. Rather than waiting for a great discussion to happen, he sets one in motion and injects the energy that keeps it going.

Calm Composure

If good conversation requires a bias towards action, it also necessitates a mastery of reaction.
In the give and take of conversation, each partner offers responses that address and build on what the other person says, and the deftness of those responses can only grow out of attentive listening. One cannot perform such dialed-in listening in a state of stress and anxiety — you cannot attend to what the other person is saying, if you are attending to an emotional maelstrom within. Anxiety will make your words jumpy, awkward, rushed, and/or mumbled. A good conversationalist must therefore learn to quiet his nerves.
Even if not stressed in socializing, a calm, cool composure is needed to keep one’s responses measured when the other person says things that may feel insulting, anger-inducing, jealousy-producing, or simply differ significantly from one’s own views. The ability to receive whatever someone says with unruffled poise and stoic equanimity makes one unafraid to enter into any kind of dialogue, with any kind of person.


A disdain for small talk is often cloaked in a contempt for the superficial, but in fact finds its roots in a less flattering form of pride. It’s the same manifestation of ego that wants to skip the less exciting early phases of any new endeavor, in order to jump right into its more interesting depths. Like the man who eschews starting at the bottom rung of a job in order to work his way up, the man who spurns small talk thinks that such “menial” conversation is beneath him.
The good conversationalist knows that the development of any pursuit starts with the basics, with gaining a grasp of the fundamentals. He doesn’t feel he is too good for chit-chat; he is willing to start small, and patiently let the talk grow bigger.

Powers of Observation

The landscape of conversation is surprisingly rich, diverse, and nuanced. There is much to notice as you journey through its contours: the places where you and the other person connect, and disagree; the topics he finds most animating to talk about; the pauses, hesitations, and subtle changes in tone that emphasize or belie the words spoken, or disclose a tremor of meaning left unexpressed; a reference mentioned in passing that points to a revelation he’d like to divulge, but is having trouble surfacing directly.
He who would turn a discussion into a deeper exploration, a conversation into a curious investigation, must be a good detective: he must keep his eyes and ears highly attuned, listen in the spaces between the “notes,” decipher clues most others would miss. He who would learn the art of conversation, also develops the art of noticing.

Decreased Self-Absorption

When we talk only about ourselves, and fail to ask the other person anything about themselves — when we boorishly interrupt, hardly allowing someone else to get a word in edgewise, and failing to listen to them when they do — conversation can be just another platform for expressing one’s narcissism.
But done properly, as a true exchange, few things can get us outside ourselves like conversation can. It allows a space in which you can cultivate real interest in others. The good conversationalist is animated by questions like: How can I understand this person better? How can I put them at ease? What feelings and experiences underlie this disclosure? What are they really trying to say? The good conversationalist willingly cedes the floor and spotlight in order to answer these questions. He is able to curb the need to interject, and to turn every subject back to himself. The good conversationalist transcends ego-absorption to notice, highlight, and engage the ideas of another. Free from feelings of jealousy or insecurity, he recognizes, appreciates, and compliments the strengths that are surfaced as another person speaks.


Conversation is a skill, an arena for proficiency and strategy, like chess.
Conversation is also an art, a cooperative act of creativity, like dance.
Conversational partners must flow together, hit the right notes, move to a harmonic music of their own composing.
Like the members of an orchestra, the participants in a conversation build something together that they could not create apart. The collision of energies within this collective combinator generates fresh, life-giving feelings, meanings, insights, and ideas.
It’s no coincidence that the places and periods in which conversation has been most celebrated — whether within the agoras of ancient Greece or the salons and coffeehouses of 18th century Europe — have also produced much of history’s most original thinking and philosophy.


Every step into conversation is a step into the unknown. How will it go? Will it result in connection? Intimacy? Embarrassment? Hostility?
It’s by reason of this unpredictability that as we approach the threshold of a conversation — especially one with weight — we feel anxiety, even fear. And it is for this reason that crossing that threshold, knowing not where it will lead, takes courage.

Curiosity and Openness

Every person is like a tiny sovereign country, a micro culture, a world onto themselves. And the passport to visiting these territories is conversation.
Every person has something to teach us, if we approach them with openness and curiosity. Because every person has had different experiences, and filters the world through them, each can give us a different angle on life. These may be educated factoids or profound insights, or, they may be subtle mindset shifts on the forces shaping humanity, the struggles folks are up against, and why people think the way they do.
The fact that we can learn from everyone with whom we converse applies not just to new acquaintances, but friends and family members we have known for years and even decades. Unfortunate is the common habit of believing we know everything there is to know about our long-time associates. Fortunate is a dedication to keeping relationships fresh — to remaining perennially curious and ever seeking new secrets, revelations, opinions, and desires — no matter how long we’ve known someone.   


Engaging another in conversation is a gift. You offer a listening ear, interest, humor, encouragement, warmth, compassion. You give your time and energy, your presence and bandwidth, your body and mind. You give the resource for which people today feel most starved: attention.
Engaging in conversation is an act of hospitality. No matter the location or circumstances, one takes on the role of host, imparting a sense of welcome, putting others at ease, helping them come home, to themselves.


It is easy to think we are cool, confident, and charming when we’re by ourselves. It is easy to think our ideas are indisputably brilliant when they’ve only been sounded within the confines of our own minds.
When we interact with our fellow humans, however, we realize we are other than what we thought. We realize we are not as smooth and secure as we like to imagine. That we are more lazy, distracted, and self-absorbed than we supposed. We find that opinions which seemed crystal clear in our heads, emerge as a confused jumble when we attempt to articulate them. Our seemingly bulletproof ideas turn out to have some very airy holes.
Conversations can be uncomfortable because they challenge the inflated self-perception we form in seclusion. Our conversational partner serves as a sounding board, which allows us to hear our own thoughts more clearly in the reverberation. Our partner acts as a mirror, which allows us to see our flaws more clearly in the reflection.


Listening well to someone else requires not using the time in which they speak to think about what you are going to say when they’re through, and instead focusing entirely on their words.
That means when it is your turn to talk, you have but a moment to gather your thoughts, before offering a coherent response. It is then impossible to know exactly what you’re going to say before you say it. You make it up as you go along. You improvise.
The materials we have at our disposal in “jerry-rigging” the content of the response depend on preparation: the reflections we’ve taken time for beforehand, the ideas we’ve contemplated in advance, the manners we’ve practiced previously.
The extemporaneous delivery of said content depends on confidence — a comfort with riding the flow, a faith in leaping without looking.

Rightly Ordered Loves

Saint Augustine argued that virtue is essentially having your loves in the right order, while sin is allowing them to be disordered. Conversation is an excellent way of ensuring you have prioritized them correctly. 
When you fully tune into a conversation, you show that you love your friend more than you love your digital device.
When you refrain from sharing juicy gossip as you talk, you show that you love integrity more than status.
When you set aside out-of-office work to have a conversation with your spouse, you show that you love relationships more than money.


People rarely change as the result of being lectured. A direct haranguing produces defensiveness rather than transformation.
Within the less guarded flow of a conversation, however, something you say can strike another with meteoric impact. Indeed, sometimes a single conversation can change the entire direction of someone’s life.
Sometimes we can offer someone a fresh angle on an old problem. Other times, we merely remind them of something they once knew, but had forgotten, or felt, but couldn’t articulate.
Often the influence we wield through conversation comes not in the form of catalyzing dramatic light bulb insights, but enacting a steady process wherein the positive language we speak, and the ideals which undergird it, slowly bring out the goodness in another. Each conversation is a chance to leave someone better than we found them. If the world changes at all, it changes one conversation at a time.


Have you ever felt your anger at someone progressively swell in the space when you were apart? The more you ruminated about them, and the wrong they had done you, the more your seething grew. Yet, when you finally saw this person face-to-face, and looked in their eyes, your anger melted away. The one-dimensional abstraction you had created of them in your mind, where all you could see was their flaw, was again replaced with a multi-faceted figure; the positive memories you share, their numerous good qualities, your feelings of affection, reasserted themselves.
Such is the power of empathy, a power activated an order of magnitude greater when we interact in person rather than at a distance. Up close, we recognize the commonalities in our hopes, fears, and struggles. We recognize that other people are just trying to make it in this mixed-up world, the same way we are. Thanks to “mirror neurons,” we actually feel what the other person feels. As a result, we experience a sense of patience and compassion that overrides the misunderstandings and unfair characterizations that arise when we only communicate digitally, if at all.

Ensouls Others

In communicating at a distance, we can lose not only our empathy for others, but sight of their very humanity. We come to see people as means rather than ends in themselves, as objects to be used, manipulated, discarded.
When we talk on our phone, while nominally interacting with a cashier, we treat them as an automaton.
When we sit next to someone at a party without saying a word, we treat them as indistinguishable from a house plant.
When we break up with someone via text, we treat them as a tool used only for pleasure.
Conversely, when we chat with the cashier, we see them as a creature of flesh-and-blood, with hopes, dreams, feelings, and life outside this role and that name-tagged smock.
When we make a comment about the weather to our fellow party guest, we acknowledge that we share the same reality.
And when we break up with someone face-to-face, we recognize them as a multifaceted human being, with whom we are not only willing to share mutual enjoyment, but mutual discomfort.
When we make room in our schedule, space in our bandwidth, to converse with another, we fulfill the most basic of human needs: to be recognized, acknowledged, seen. We en-value people with our words. We ensoul them with our attention.


With all the above qualities, the arrows of conversation work both ways.
Cultivating inner decorum leads to outward decorum. Generosity of spirit leads to generosity of speech. A well-ordered mind leads to a well-ordered exchange.
At the same time, as conversations call upon qualities of patience and courage, effort and creativity, humility and influence, these virtues are honed through practice.
Conversation then both requires character, and refines it. Available to us daily, such exercise strengthens the soul of the individual, and the heart of society. The health of family, town, state, and country, ultimately emerges from the skill and art, the power and pleasure, of one-on-one exchanges.

Tuesday, August 13, 2019

Greece wants Raparations for WWII

I first blogged about Greece and Debt in 2012 shortly when I started blogging.  I have blogged about Greece quite a bit, especially in the beginning because of the debt issues.  Greece was forced to institute "Austerity" measures to get the money from the EU and Germany is the economic powerhouse and they are calling most of the shots.  Now apparently Greece is asking for reparations from Germany for war damages from WWII.  I have severe issues with this.  Germany was decimated by WWII and they rebuilt themselves after the war.  Greece had the same opportunity and seemed to squandered their opportunity and now they are trying to get more stuff From Germany after the bailout.  Greece has promised more than they can deliver to their citizens and now they are passing the cup to Germany.   Now Greece is wanting even more money from Germany.  If I was the Germans, I would say "Nein".  "Dis hund nicht Jagt" or this dog don't hunt.   

I was reading this article, I have been harping on debt almost as soon as I started blogging.  The E.U thinks that they bailed out Greece, but they basically kicked the can down the road.  Greece will not implement the austerity measures, the politicians have promised soo much free stuff to the population, now the bill is coming due and the population are angry.  They still want all their "free stuff" that has been promised.  The same thing will come here in a few years when the democrat base want their free stuff and the spigot shuts off.
     Something that I noticed in this article is that the government will legislate to force the bondholders to eat the loss.  This disturbs me on several levels  The government will legislate you to lose your money to accept a political settlement?   What happened to the rule of contract law? What about the indenture terms?  The government by imperial fiat made a decree and removed the collective action clause.   What does this do for the bond market?  I guarantee private investors will dump bonds as soon as they are able.  People buy bonds for investments and as a way to save their money in a volatile market.  After this and the imperial edict, they will bail.

German artillery fires during the advance through Greece, 1941. Bundesarchiv
German artillery fires during the advance through Greece, 1941. Bundesarchiv

Left-wing politicians in Greece are pushing for Germany to pay reparations for the damages it caused during World War II. The parliamentary committee has called for a debate on the subject.
For its part, Germany has refused to entertain the notion that it owes anything to Greece. They have refused to pay and have refused to even negotiate with Greece.
But experts in Germany’s Parliament have released a report that undermines the German government position.
The Scientific Services of the Parliament released their findings which were commissioned by the Left Party. In part, the report states that the government is not violating international law by their position, but it is “by no means compulsory.” The report further recommends taking the case to the International Court of Justice to receive legal guidance in the matter.

When the Wehrmacht withdrew from Greece in October 1944 after three and a half years of occupation, it literally left behind “scorched land”: the economy, currency and infrastructure were completely destroyed.
When the Wehrmacht withdrew from Greece in October 1944 after three and a half years of occupation, it literally left behind “scorched land”: the economy, currency and infrastructure were completely destroyed.
The court at the Hague cannot on its own take up the case since the actions in question occurred over 70 years ago. The German government would need to agree to the process which it has explicitly rejected.
Back in June, the Minister of State at the Federal Foreign Office was asked about the Greek demands and he stated that neither side wished to have the International Court of Justice settle the question.
The Left Party’s deputy, Heike Hansel, said that the report showed that the German government is no longer able to avoid their responsibility for the past actions of the country. He continued by stating that the German government had “completely failed on this issue.”
The government’s position is that all WWII issues were resolved in 1990 with the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany (also referred to as the Two Plus Four Agreement).
The treaty was signed by both East and West Germany. Those are the “Two” in the “Two Plus Four.” The “Four” who signed were the US, the USSR, France and the UK. It allowed for Germany to become a unified and fully sovereign country.
For its part, Germany accepted its current border with Poland and renounced the other claims it had made to territory.
Reparations were not included in the agreement and Greece was not a party in the negotiations for the treaty.
Germany points to the 1945 Potsdam Conference as resolving the question of reparations. The Soviet Union settled the reparation claims of its satellite countries in large part by supplying them with industrial equipment. For their part, the other Allied countries resolved to settle the reparation claims of other countries by dividing up German industrial and naval assets.

The big three.
                                         The big three at Potsdam
Germany also signed an agreement with twelve other nations in the 1950s. Greece was included in this agreement and received 115 million Deutsche marks in 1960 as the final settlement to its claims.
Germany has spent 76 billion euros to compensate for the crimes its Nazi leaders committed in WWII.
What remains to be seen is whether the new government in Greece which was elected on July 7 will continue to push Germany for the reparations.
Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, who was elected on July 7, is expected to make his first trip to Germany.
Poland is also demanding reparations from Germany. Between the two countries, $1.2 trillion in claims are being levied against the Germans.
Poland is expected to release a report on September 1 which coincides with the 80th anniversary of the start of WWII. The report is expected to demand $850 billion from the Germans.
Of course, all this posturing is mainly a way for politicians in the two countries to grab the attention of their voters. The current ruling party in Greece ran on a platform of getting justice from Germany and reducing the country’s debt. They have thus far achieved neither goal so they need to show the voters that they are still working on the issues.

Monday, August 12, 2019

Monday Music "Like a Virgin" by Madonna

I am continuing my series of music that I don't like or care for.  This time I went with Madonna "Like a Virgin".  When I first heard this song, the nasally New York accent was a definite turn off.  Even now I will turn the station when this song comes on my 80's channel on my Sirius/XM.  My opinion of Madonna changed when I heard her "Live to tell" and "like a Prayer".  From what I heard she had used a voice coach to lose the nasally New York accent she had.  I remember in the 90's when she was in her "Hedonistic" stage and Rush Limbaugh commented that she will reinvent herself as a symbol of "motherhood".  He said this in 1994 and a couple of years later Madonna revamped her image as a Mom.  For some reason I remembered that because it was so incongruous.   I do like her later music but I wish she would stay out of politics..

"Like a Virgin" is a song recorded by American singer Madonna for her second studio album Like a Virgin (1984). It was released on October 31, 1984, by Sire Records as the album's lead single. The song was written by Tom Kelly and Billy Steinberg, and produced by Nile Rodgers; Steinberg said that the song was inspired by his personal experiences of romance. "Like a Virgin" was chosen for Madonna by Michael Ostin of Warner Bros. Records after listening to a demo sung by Kelly. Rodgers initially felt that the song did not have a sufficient hook, but subsequently changed his opinion after the song was stuck in his head.

Musically, "Like a Virgin" is a dance-oriented song, composed of two hooks. Madonna's voice is heard in a high register while a continuous arrangement of synths are heard along the bassline. The song's lyrics are ambiguous, consisting of hidden innuendos and open to various interpretations. "Like a Virgin" received positive reviews from music critics, who frequently called it as one of the defining songs for Madonna. It became her first number-one single on the record charts in Australia, Canada, Japan, and the United States, while reaching the top ten elsewhere.
The song's music video portrayed Madonna sailing down the canals of Venice in a gondola, as well as roaming around a palace wearing a white wedding dress. With the video, scholars noted Madonna's portrayal of a sexually independent and strong woman, similarity of a man wearing a lion's mask to that of Saint Mark and the link between the eroticism in the video and the vitality of Venice. Madonna has performed the song in seven of her concert tours. Most of the time, her performances of "Like a Virgin" were associated with strong reaction and uproar from the media.
"Like a Virgin" has been covered by a number of artists and has appeared in or been referenced in feature films such as Reservoir Dogs, Moulin Rouge! and Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason. Family groups sought to ban it as they believed the song promoted sex outside or without marriage. On the other hand, Madonna's public persona of an indomitable, sexually unashamed, supremely confident woman was widely accepted by the younger generation who emulated her style and fashion. Scholars have credited "Like a Virgin" as the song which cemented her position as a pop culture icon.

The music video, directed by Mary Lambert, who worked with Madonna in her video for "Borderline", was shot in Venice and partly in New York City in July 1984. Madonna was portrayed as a knowing virgin, a figment of the pornographic mind, as she walked through marble rooms, wearing a wedding gown. It alternated with scenes of a provocative-looking Madonna on board a gondola.[42] She commented, "[Lambert] wanted me to be the modern-day, worldly-wise girl that I am. But then we wanted to go back in time and use myself as an actual virgin."The video starts with Madonna boarding on a boat from the Brooklyn Bridge and travels to Venice. As she steps down into the city, she moves like a stripper and undulated sinuously. She wears a black dress and blue pants with a number of Christian symbol embedded jewelry around her neck. She sings the song at full volume as she watches a lion walking between the columns of the Piazza San Marco of Venice and along the statue of Saint Mark.
A number of game-playing involving carnival masks, men and lions are portrayed with allusions to eighteenth-century practices and Saint Mark. Sheila Whiteley, author of Women and popular music: sexuality, identity, and subjectivity, felt that Madonna's image signified a denial of sexual knowledge, but also portrayed her in simulated writhing on a gondola, thus underpinning the simulation of deceit. The intrusion of a male lion, confirmed the underlying bestial discourse of both mythological fairy tale and pornographic sex. Whiteley observed that in the video, Madonna's lover wears the lion's mask and while cavorting with him, Madonna sheds the veneer of innocence and shows her propensity for wild animal passions. Having instilled desire, metaphorically she turns her lover into a Beast.  Madonna commented about shooting with the lion:
"The lion didn't do anything he was supposed to do, and I ended up leaning against this pillar with his head in my crotch... I thought he was going to take a bite out of me so I lifted the veil I was wearing and had a stare-down with him and he opened his mouth and let out this huge roar. I got so frightened my heart fell in my shoe. When he finally walked away, the director yelled 'Cut' and I had to take a long breather. But I could really relate to the lion. I feel like in a past life I was a lion or a cat or something."

   Weird Al did a parody of her song and it was well received.  It was said that you know that you made it as a star when Weird Al does a parody of you.

"Like a Surgeon" is a song recorded by "Weird Al" Yankovic that appears on his third studio album, Dare to Be Stupid (1985). It was released as the album's second single on June 4, 1985, by Scotti Brothers Records. It was issued as a 7", 12", and picture disc. A parody of the pop song "Like a Virgin" by Madonna, its lyrics describe a hospital environment, with the same melody as Madonna's original. The track was written by Yankovic and Madonna, with the latter coming up with the parody's title, an act Yankovic generally discourages. Rick Derringer served as the executive producer.

"Like a Surgeon" was well received by music critics, who praised Yankovic's take on Madonna's single. Another critic called it "as good" as "Like a Virgin". In the United States, it peaked at number 47 on the Billboard Hot 100, becoming his fifth entry in that country at the time. It also peaked in the top forty of Australia and Canada, with the former peaking at number 19. For live performances of the recording, Yankovic further borrowed elements from Madonna's renditions, singing live in a hospital surrounding, sporting similar outfits and costumes.

The music video is set in a hospital. It parodies several elements of the promotional video for "Like a Virgin", famously set in Venice; Yankovic singing on a moving gurney references Madonna on a canal boat, and both videos feature a lion at the beginning. During one scene, a Madonna wannabe is sitting in a corner filing her nails. At the end of the "Like a Surgeon" music video, dance moves and scene changes spoof the video for Madonna's "Burning Up", then Yankovic and two dancers perform a routine that spoofs the video for "Lucky Star". Both songs appear on Madonna's first album. The video also includes the famous PA announcement from The Three Stooges ("Paging Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard"). The visual would later be included on Yankovic's 1992 video album The "Weird Al" Yankovic Video Library.
Filming was done at a closed hospital that had been turned into a set for various productions where hospital shots were needed. The lion was real, and Yankovic recalled several of the actors were slightly intimidated by the lion being led though the sets.

Friday, August 9, 2019

I am just tired........

I am just tired.....We have had a couple of shootings last weekend by a guy that hated mexicans because they would interfere with the implementation of the "Green new deal" and a guy that was an Elizabeth Warren supporter and the liberal left lost their mind and immediately started blaming President Trump and Republicans and NRA members and anyone else that don't reside in their bubble...but I am really tired...

    We are having the same people that a couple of months ago screaming and having"The Vapors" about concentrations camps ran by the government, all of a sudden want me to hand my various assorted bullet launchers to the same benevolent government.......
      We are having the same people  who were screeching like gibbon monkeys about the evil of President Trump and the government now want me to hand my assorted bullet launchers to the government of President Trump
       We are having the same people that are shrieking "tolerance" and "Diversity" and "acceptance" for everyone......unless you are a conservative gun owner than you need to "Just die"...

      These are the people that want to kill me, my family and my friends because they don't like me.  I would explain things to these people but I am just tired and I have reached a point that I don't want to talk anymore...
        There are others on the left that want to send me, my family and friends to concentration camps because they don't like me because I am a conservative lawful gun owner...
On a Signpost in NYC
      We are having people that flat out believe that they are in the right and they believe that we are "Nazi's " and we are subhumans and that we deserve everything bad that happens to us.  They believe that they are on the "right" side of history and they claim to hate violence unless the violence is targeting their political opponents.  I used to say "You want to get rid of all guns so only the government will have them so we can be Safe?"  and they uniformly tell me yes....and I inwardly shudder and think of Dachau and I have Blogged about it several times...but I am just tired...
        We have people on the left that want to use violence on their fellow Americans because they don't like how they look, act or think.....The Left wants to so ostracize the people that they don't like because they and their media hacks wants to make sure that Donald Trump is a one term president and the people that support him pay in blood and tears and pain.  They want to strip their opponents of political power and influence and totally marginalize them and they use their foot soldiers for Soros also known as "Antifa" like the brownshirts of old But I am really tired....


          The left wants to totally control the levers of government, they want to have total control over you and yours because they are the compassionate ones and they by their education, are totally superior to us "Dirt People", they want us to keep working and being productive to support the system so they can skim off it lord over us like the nobles of old.

 The endgame is to totally strip the power of the middle class because we are the checks and balances on those that would seek to rule us by imperial fiat.   We are considered the modern day Kulaks and the modern left wants to break us like their hero Stalin did to the Kulaks of old.  The Modern left wants to demonize us, harass us, ridicule us and strip us of our 2nd amendment rights so they can do to us like Stalin did to his "Kulaks"

Here is a quote from a rant I did back in 2015 before Donald Trump was even on the radar and Hillary was warming up for her coronation because it was "Her Turn".

 " Now to the 3rd part of my rant.  the EndGame....You have noticed the drumbeats of the SJW's against white people and this is by design...Most all of them have read the book by Saul Alinsky, The Rules for Radicals
     Most of the SJW's are schooled in Marxist thoughts and beliefs..this is by intent,

In Rules for Radicals, several themes persist throughout Alinsky’s lessons to future community organizers. The most notable is his use of symbol construction to strengthen the unity within an organization. Often, he would draw on loyalty to a particular church or religious affiliation to create a firmly structured organization with which to operate. The reason being that symbols by which communities could identify themselves created strongly structured organizations that were easier to mobilize in implementing direct action. Once the community was united behind a common symbol, Alinsky would find a common enemy for the community to be united against.
The use of common enemy against a community was done to promote another theme of Rules for Radicals, nonviolent conflict as a uniting element in communities. Alinsky would find an external antagonist to turn into a common enemy for the community within which he was operating. Often, this enemy would be a local politician or agency that had some involvement with activity that was causing detriment to the community. His goal was to unite a group through conflict with an external antagonist. Once the enemy was established, the community would come together in opposition of it.
     This management of conflict heightened awareness within the community as to the similarities its members shared as well as what differentiated them from those outside of their organization. The use of conflict also allowed for the goal of the group to be clearly defined. With an established external antagonist, the community’s goal would be to defeat that enemy, whether it be a politician, policy, or opposing agency.

     I have mentioned in the past that the modern SJW's are Marxist and they are doing what history taught them.  I will  make a historical point..remember the external antagonist that is required for the SJW's?

According to the political theory of Marxism–Leninism of the early 20th century, the kulaks were class enemies of the poorer peasants. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin described them as "bloodsuckers, vampires, plunderers of the people and profiteers, who fatten on famine.” Marxism–Leninism had intended a revolution to liberate poor peasants and farm laborers alongside the proletariat (urban and industrial workers). In addition, the planned economy of Soviet Bolshevism required the collectivisation of farms and land to allow industrialisation or conversion to large-scale agricultural production. In practice, government officials violently seized kulak farms and murdered resisters; others were deported to labor camps.

    According to the political theory of Marxism–Obamaism of the early 21th century, the white people were class enemies of the poorer peasants. Barack Obama described them as "bloodsuckers, vampires, bitter clingers, plunderers of the people and profiteers, who fatten on white privilege.” Marxism–Obamaism intended a revolution to liberate poor urban people and farm laborers alongside the cube dweller. In addition, the planned economy of Globalism Bolshevism required the collectivization of assets to allow  the future green economy or conversion to large-scale clean energy production. In practice, government officials violently seized white middle class assets and murdered resisters; others were deported to FEMA camps..

     It isn't much of a stretch, I see history replaying before me, I see the same thing that Lenin and later Stalin did to break the power of the kulaks whom were land owning peasants.  In the modern sense, they need to break what they call the political power of the middle class to guarantee their power.  If they can use social pressure to make a law to seize the assets of people that are considered "class enemies".  Remember the 401K's that millions of people have....most of them are middle class and white.  That is an example.  That is billions of dollars sitting in there where the government can't touch it....But the government can change the rules, then seize it....You doubt me?  look at Greece, Cyprus and other places.  The government seized assets for the "Common good".  See a parallel?  the outrage you see against whites is just an excuse for plunder on a wide scale.  The government in the name of social justice and equality can and will seize assets....They will use the social outrage, the same thing Lenin and Stalin used against the Kulaks to further the transforming of Russia into the Soviet Union.  The enemy of the political elites are the middle class, the SJW's are useful idiots being used to create a have and an have not society.  The middle class is a check on the power of the political elite.  The elitist would have a complete society that depended on them for sustenance..once you control their sustenance, you control them....then you can do whatever you wanted.  That is the Endgame."

     I am just tired...I don't want to explain anymore...........

Thursday, August 8, 2019

another quick post..and some upgrades.

I still am on Jury duty, interesting case....all I can say.  Well some doings here at casa de Garabaldi

First off I performed an upgrade on my truck, Amazon had a sale on these things...
The price was $79 and it was wireless from the camera to the monitor.

   I did run a tap from the camera to the rear taillights and tapped into the reverse lights so the camera would come on when the reverse lights came on.   I do have to get some shielding for the connectors, apparently they are picking up interferance sometimes when I use the brakes.  or actually when my son uses the brakes because he is the one driving the truck right now.

I also ran the power wire behind the headliner to clean up the appearance.  It used the what I call a cigarette lighter plug so I fished that behind the dash.   Note the bracket behind the monitor.
I replaced my Sirius/XM Antenna, the old one was 14 years old and getting BBQed on the roof of the truck played heck with the electronics.  I ran the new one inside the truck and as long as the antenna has a clear view of the sky it will work.   I zip tied the excess slack inside the A piller behind the trim piece along with the excess from the power cord for the monitor.
 This is what the camera looks like on top of the license plate.

I also replaced the ventviser that flew off earlier this year.  I got a "in the channel" version so it should last longer.