Marketing to silicon valley and legally sponsored insider trading help to fund her $10/quart gelato, covid haircuts and all of the collagen lip injections and face tightening she's ever wanted.
Marketing to silicon valley and legally sponsored insider trading help to fund her $10/quart gelato, covid haircuts and all of the collagen lip injections and face tightening she's ever wanted.
I am the most indecisive of deciders. My Federal Department of health recommends cannabis for people my age. It ain't going to kill us prematurely and seems to slow or stop Alzheimer's. For people my age who've always held their sanity suspect, it is welcome advice.
I recommend LA Kush over Gelato but only by .2 on a ten point scale and at about $25 for 3.5 grams who needs millions of dollars to be content at our age?
Can I recommend my own comment? Is that at least kosher style?
Funny thing about the truth. For people my age keeping us at home so we can live long and prosper is the kind of investment only governments understand. Their job is to protect us from future disruptions in the supply chain. My government has done a superb job but for us our future is our great grandchildren. We are Darwinian and Darwin is about natural selection not design.
Moe is a moe-ron (see what I did there?) who mistakes randomness for creativity, and, much worse, worships the stylish fascism of Trudeau.
Pathetic, Moe. You live in paradise while your fellow citizens are lied about, attacked and abused by your hero. That isn't just wrong-headed, it's vile.
Is that all you have? Like most others on Matt's site, you just throw your feces around because you have little of substance to add to any given discussion. What does any of that post mean? The fact is that the US political system is setup to be corrupt because it allows money to flow to candidates whether as campaign contributions, honorarium for votes disguised as speaking payments, allowing ex-officials to become paid lobbyists, etc, and any move to control that legal corruption has been opposed by the GOP, including Mitch McConnell who has obstructed moving bills along in the process. Also, a big part of the problem is in a disengaged electorate that likes to whine and use ideology to choose their team that enables the least competent in the electorate to gain an office. And this is exacerbated by gerrymandering that should be outlawed at the federal level replacing humans with algorithms that create districts entirely on population, not party, race, or any other factor.
It's cute you believe that politicians operate in silos. That's very good to believe if you're in the tank for one of the sociopathic teams, which seems to be your domain. Call me when the shuttle lands.
Jeff I just entertained a scientist friend from Silicon Valley. He is a little over half my age but he is a brilliant scientist. He tells me the giants of silicon valley are as banal as they come. It is all a game, morality ethics and conscience play no part in who can piss highest up the wall.
My friend is a great scientist and I love playing games but he never plays games.
To attribute a moral or ethical or philosophical foundation to a pissing match is lunacy but your comments always seem to me to make sense.
It is possible to be ignorant and wise and brilliant and be a jackass.
Noam Chomsky is a libertarian. We are not talking linguistic philosopher libertarian we are talking sophistry and illogic.
How insane does one have to be to believe we need anarchy to take us through an information revolution. The only remedy to bullshit is truth and in America truth doesn't make it to the Big Brother's giant screen.
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.
I have one eye that works but I am sane and the last thing I want to be is king.
"How insane does one have to be to believe we need anarchy to take us through an information revolution. "
I don't know if you have ever read or heard what anarchists think would happen without institutional government, if you haven't try listening to Michael Malice on Lex Fridman's podcast:
I don't see how it would work beyond the traditional clan or tribe level, such as with the American Indians, but they apparently do. In a nutshell, it seems to me that they have a big problem with government's control of violence that has no balance with the individual. An example of theirs is the hypocrisy of the founding fathers claiming that rights were inherent and then claiming that blacks had none. Today's conservatives are again proving that they don't believe in rights, merely the tyranny of the majority in their rejection of Roe.
"Noam Chomsky is a libertarian. We are not talking linguistic philosopher libertarian we are talking sophistry and illogic."
I never said that it was. Libertarians are liberal, they posit that rights are inherent, they are not granted. So, as with liberalism as a whole, libertarianism runs a spectrum, not all subscribe to Ayn Rand's "selfishness" doctrine.
I think John Ralston Saul's Voltaire's Bastards (The Dictatorship of Reason in the West) belongs in the Western Philosophical Canon. As Saul might say Rand is a third rate philosopher at best.
In the 1990s Time magazine called Saul a prophet.
It is 2022 and Saul is still prophetizing.
Noam Chomsky is what I knew as a libertarian 60 years ago and he has a solid moral compass. When Goldwater read his convention speech the Libertarians almost expelled Karl Hess the Third who had written the speech from their membership. They knew the GOP was totalitarian.
They knew Reagan was a fascist and Goldwater was an ignoramous and a useful idiot.
The political divide in the GOP is not a polarized divide it is three extremes. It is Fascist, it is conservative and it is libertarian. Fascist is the opposite of libertarian and fascist and libertarian are different galaxies with different metaphysics.
When you understand the difference between libertarianism and conservatism we can talk about the meaning of fascism and maybe we can talk about real philosophers like Hannah Arendt.
I am neither a libertarian nor an American Conservative. I am a Quebec conservative. We have an impenetrable wall between church and state and peace order and good government.
We are a secular humanist liberal democracy and whatever else you are you are the mightiest Empire that ever was and have the power to destroy or help repair the world.
I keep it simple, liberals accept that rights are inherent, conservatives accept that rights are inherited.
What I find interesting is that the Ayn Rand libertarians and conservatives agree with the elite control but for different reasons: a) libertarians because they are more industrious as proven by their wealth and (b) conservatives because they are god's elect; Wealth is either a) a result of greater intellect and capability or (b) a sign of one's righteousness. This allows the GOP's pro-business, pro-wealthy libertarians to coexist with their Evangelicals.
I am a progressive liberal, I posit that as moral beings and evolved social animals we have obligations to others, including nonhumans and that rights are the corollary to the obligations of moral beings that apply to all beings, regardless of how we value them or how we place ourselves in the universe. I agree with Tikkun Olam, but that includes all beings, human and nonhuman.
In Quebec we are real Chomsky type libertarians and liberty and freedom don't come free. We speak French or at least a derivative and libertarian and democratic are synonyms. Maybe Saul's abridged The Collapse of Globalism and the reinvention of the world 1997 is better first introduction to Socratic Philosophy in the 21st century.
Quebec is more American than America we are still in the heyday of a democratic revolution. Saul was educated at McGill and King's College London or there abouts and London is about as far from England as one can get.
In Quebec chickens have more rights than corporations. And chickens haven't got the rights we have under the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and freedom. 1982.
We are Chomsky libertarian and ethics and values are Secular Humanist and Voltaire is our go to philosopher and he died as America was born and he not the patriots who inspired the revolution.
Ask Benjamin Franklin he was a scientist a Deist, an abolitionist and he was fluently bilingual and Montreal was his second home. He helped found Montreal's English language daily by convincing the French Speaking owner that what Quebecer's needed was Deism not Catholicism.
And even today in Deist Quebec the Montreal Gazette is more American than Quebecois.
I live in Appalachia it begins in the Gulf of the St Lawrence River.
It is where one Quebec's two founding fathers was born . He and Trudeau were the oppositions t6o each other Quebec was founded at a confrence table not a battle site. Rene Levesque was a journalist who learned his trade in FDR's European command. He covered the liberation of Dachau and I am a Montreal Jew who great grandparents are buried in Montreal because the Russian Empire destroyed the enlightenment in the Crimea and everywhere else they could conquer.
In 1854 Tenny wrote the Charge of the Light Brigade where the 600 went on a suicide mission in Crimea and attacked the Russian Army while they had already lost the war.
The 600 were the elite of British society.
Tennyson wrote an homage to the six hundred.
Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do and die.
What is worth dying for when we have such great linguistic philosophers like Chomsky and Pinker?
One more thing, for the claims of "liberal" media, the tell is in the number of interviews on the major media outlets with Chomsky. That claim is utter bullshit as proven by the answer to that question.
There are myriad issues to discuss here, but I will limit it to the fact that Canada obtained its sovereignty without violence through a series of purely legal actions starting in 1867 and ending in 1982 while the colonists in the lower 13 colonies chose war. Both of our nations are formed from the same European powers, yet we chose different paths to sovereignty. Here are two major tells about the US:
1. For all of the talk of liberty and freedom from the mouths of our founding fathers, they claimed rights for themselves that they denied to their property, black people.
2. We fought communism, that workers control their own lives, as it refuted our belief that wealth indicates competency and moral superiority.
We do consider ourselves THE bright shining city on a hill and that enables myth that both conservative and libertarian Americans can fight for. But libertarians prove their hypocrisy in not fighting against conservatism's attack on rights because it serves their economic interests, which are prized above all as wealth ensures greater privilege, such as they are quite quiet about the conservative infringement on women's rights and the wealthy women will always be able to end an unwanted pregnancy; Libertarians are inherently duplicitous because their concerns are wealth and not rights per se.
BTW, I remember when the Quebec separatist movement was a big deal. For all of our bullshit claims abut English being the "official" language, we have no official language!
I have few disagreements but John Ralston Saul is my Canadian philosopher and The Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson is Canada's only hyphenated Canadian she is a Canadian Canadian.
Might I suggest Saul's The Comeback to understand some of the complexity of our nation.
I know America history better than America's leading historians I learned real American history in school while others listened to all the bull shit from the front of the room.
Benjamin Franklin (Bonhomme Richard ) was second only to Voltaire in the hierarchy of philosophical thought and being a great journalist we know abour Benjamin who son became Governor General of Nova Scotia after the coup.
Franklin was a staunch abolitionist, he was a Deist, he was a scientist, he was a humourist he was a public intellectual, statesman and a globalist.
Needless to say after the coup they sent him to Paris which back then was on the other side of the moon. In 1776 there was the linguistic philosopher Samuel Johnson, the social philosopher the ultra liberal Edmund Burke the Whig and Rousseau was breathing.
Not only slaves were chattel but everything on the land belonged to the people that owned the land. It wasn't the British who owned America but men like Franklin who freed his slaves. It was a deed and your gonads that gave you your humanity in 1776. In Britain the great liberal philosopher Edmond Burke wanted everyone even women to become fully human.
It was East India Company tea dumped in Boston harbour and it was the East Company that ran colonial America. The ships in Boston harbour flew the East India Company flag.
Marx wasn't born but Franklin was a socialist who believed in the same Humanism as Voltaire.
The truth is never simple but the truth is the truth.
In 1688 all of Britain and her empire was democratic and the monarchy lost its power to the parliaments. America was more Magna Carta than the Rights of Man and the land belonged to the Barons.
Try reading the second stanza of Star Spangled Banner it is about the rights of the Barons.
Somethings Scalia knew well he was a gifted sophist who originalism consisted of carrying around Johnson's dictionary.
Your first post was insipid and you've flat-lined since.
But whatever. I sense that you are of a particular ilk that has, as it's greatest (among many) flaws, a complete lack of self-awareness. Award yourself another prize and go away. You win, and the commentary here is improved. Deal?
Marketing to silicon valley and legally sponsored insider trading help to fund her $10/quart gelato, covid haircuts and all of the collagen lip injections and face tightening she's ever wanted.
I am the most indecisive of deciders. My Federal Department of health recommends cannabis for people my age. It ain't going to kill us prematurely and seems to slow or stop Alzheimer's. For people my age who've always held their sanity suspect, it is welcome advice.
I recommend LA Kush over Gelato but only by .2 on a ten point scale and at about $25 for 3.5 grams who needs millions of dollars to be content at our age?
Can I recommend my own comment? Is that at least kosher style?
Funny thing about the truth. For people my age keeping us at home so we can live long and prosper is the kind of investment only governments understand. Their job is to protect us from future disruptions in the supply chain. My government has done a superb job but for us our future is our great grandchildren. We are Darwinian and Darwin is about natural selection not design.
Since e.pierce is off the job, I'll take my turn.
Moe is a moe-ron (see what I did there?) who mistakes randomness for creativity, and, much worse, worships the stylish fascism of Trudeau.
Pathetic, Moe. You live in paradise while your fellow citizens are lied about, attacked and abused by your hero. That isn't just wrong-headed, it's vile.
Silicon Valley is a libertarian stronghold, not progressive by any measure.
Doesn't matter. She does their biding. Poverty, crime, terrible schools and corruption keep the money flowing. That's all that counts.
Is that all you have? Like most others on Matt's site, you just throw your feces around because you have little of substance to add to any given discussion. What does any of that post mean? The fact is that the US political system is setup to be corrupt because it allows money to flow to candidates whether as campaign contributions, honorarium for votes disguised as speaking payments, allowing ex-officials to become paid lobbyists, etc, and any move to control that legal corruption has been opposed by the GOP, including Mitch McConnell who has obstructed moving bills along in the process. Also, a big part of the problem is in a disengaged electorate that likes to whine and use ideology to choose their team that enables the least competent in the electorate to gain an office. And this is exacerbated by gerrymandering that should be outlawed at the federal level replacing humans with algorithms that create districts entirely on population, not party, race, or any other factor.
Poverty and crime are both affected by education, controlled at the local and state levels, so Pelosi has nothing to do with them (https://www.ppic.org/publication/financing-californias-public-schools/). Poverty and crime are complex subjects that are directly affected by education as it affects competency, the less competent one is, the greater the risk of poverty and crime. Another factor is opportunity as discussed in this piece: https://www.ibtimes.com/why-more-black-engineers-arent-being-hired-silicon-valley-2178221.
It's cute you believe that politicians operate in silos. That's very good to believe if you're in the tank for one of the sociopathic teams, which seems to be your domain. Call me when the shuttle lands.
If you have nothing to post, don't.
You're still going on? Please, go play in traffic.
LOL! don't post if you have nothing to add to the discussion.
Please, shhhh
Yes, shhhhh! don't post if you have nothing to add!
Jeff I just entertained a scientist friend from Silicon Valley. He is a little over half my age but he is a brilliant scientist. He tells me the giants of silicon valley are as banal as they come. It is all a game, morality ethics and conscience play no part in who can piss highest up the wall.
My friend is a great scientist and I love playing games but he never plays games.
To attribute a moral or ethical or philosophical foundation to a pissing match is lunacy but your comments always seem to me to make sense.
It is possible to be ignorant and wise and brilliant and be a jackass.
Noam Chomsky is a libertarian. We are not talking linguistic philosopher libertarian we are talking sophistry and illogic.
How insane does one have to be to believe we need anarchy to take us through an information revolution. The only remedy to bullshit is truth and in America truth doesn't make it to the Big Brother's giant screen.
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.
I have one eye that works but I am sane and the last thing I want to be is king.
"How insane does one have to be to believe we need anarchy to take us through an information revolution. "
I don't know if you have ever read or heard what anarchists think would happen without institutional government, if you haven't try listening to Michael Malice on Lex Fridman's podcast:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2tXN7ZnSfU&list=PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4&index=32
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5rNoV1Qy_Q&list=PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4&index=85&t=216s
I don't see how it would work beyond the traditional clan or tribe level, such as with the American Indians, but they apparently do. In a nutshell, it seems to me that they have a big problem with government's control of violence that has no balance with the individual. An example of theirs is the hypocrisy of the founding fathers claiming that rights were inherent and then claiming that blacks had none. Today's conservatives are again proving that they don't believe in rights, merely the tyranny of the majority in their rejection of Roe.
"Noam Chomsky is a libertarian. We are not talking linguistic philosopher libertarian we are talking sophistry and illogic."
I never said that it was. Libertarians are liberal, they posit that rights are inherent, they are not granted. So, as with liberalism as a whole, libertarianism runs a spectrum, not all subscribe to Ayn Rand's "selfishness" doctrine.
"To attribute a moral or ethical or philosophical foundation to a pissing match is lunacy but your comments always seem to me to make sense."
But it is that libertarianism doesn't require them to have any more ethical or philosophical foundation than concern about themselves, about their wealth: https://aynrand.org/novels/the-virtue-of-selfishness/
I think John Ralston Saul's Voltaire's Bastards (The Dictatorship of Reason in the West) belongs in the Western Philosophical Canon. As Saul might say Rand is a third rate philosopher at best.
In the 1990s Time magazine called Saul a prophet.
It is 2022 and Saul is still prophetizing.
Noam Chomsky is what I knew as a libertarian 60 years ago and he has a solid moral compass. When Goldwater read his convention speech the Libertarians almost expelled Karl Hess the Third who had written the speech from their membership. They knew the GOP was totalitarian.
They knew Reagan was a fascist and Goldwater was an ignoramous and a useful idiot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akYYm47pCP4
The political divide in the GOP is not a polarized divide it is three extremes. It is Fascist, it is conservative and it is libertarian. Fascist is the opposite of libertarian and fascist and libertarian are different galaxies with different metaphysics.
When you understand the difference between libertarianism and conservatism we can talk about the meaning of fascism and maybe we can talk about real philosophers like Hannah Arendt.
I am neither a libertarian nor an American Conservative. I am a Quebec conservative. We have an impenetrable wall between church and state and peace order and good government.
We are a secular humanist liberal democracy and whatever else you are you are the mightiest Empire that ever was and have the power to destroy or help repair the world.
Tikkun Olam
Thanks for that title, it's in my favorites (https://archive.org/details/voltairesbastard00saul_0) for me to find easier when I finish my current book.
Regarding debates, I found this interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q24cpnHzx8I&t=1s
Anarchist v conservative.
I keep it simple, liberals accept that rights are inherent, conservatives accept that rights are inherited.
What I find interesting is that the Ayn Rand libertarians and conservatives agree with the elite control but for different reasons: a) libertarians because they are more industrious as proven by their wealth and (b) conservatives because they are god's elect; Wealth is either a) a result of greater intellect and capability or (b) a sign of one's righteousness. This allows the GOP's pro-business, pro-wealthy libertarians to coexist with their Evangelicals.
I am a progressive liberal, I posit that as moral beings and evolved social animals we have obligations to others, including nonhumans and that rights are the corollary to the obligations of moral beings that apply to all beings, regardless of how we value them or how we place ourselves in the universe. I agree with Tikkun Olam, but that includes all beings, human and nonhuman.
In Quebec we are real Chomsky type libertarians and liberty and freedom don't come free. We speak French or at least a derivative and libertarian and democratic are synonyms. Maybe Saul's abridged The Collapse of Globalism and the reinvention of the world 1997 is better first introduction to Socratic Philosophy in the 21st century.
Quebec is more American than America we are still in the heyday of a democratic revolution. Saul was educated at McGill and King's College London or there abouts and London is about as far from England as one can get.
In Quebec chickens have more rights than corporations. And chickens haven't got the rights we have under the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and freedom. 1982.
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/
We are Chomsky libertarian and ethics and values are Secular Humanist and Voltaire is our go to philosopher and he died as America was born and he not the patriots who inspired the revolution.
Ask Benjamin Franklin he was a scientist a Deist, an abolitionist and he was fluently bilingual and Montreal was his second home. He helped found Montreal's English language daily by convincing the French Speaking owner that what Quebecer's needed was Deism not Catholicism.
And even today in Deist Quebec the Montreal Gazette is more American than Quebecois.
I live in Appalachia it begins in the Gulf of the St Lawrence River.
It is where one Quebec's two founding fathers was born . He and Trudeau were the oppositions t6o each other Quebec was founded at a confrence table not a battle site. Rene Levesque was a journalist who learned his trade in FDR's European command. He covered the liberation of Dachau and I am a Montreal Jew who great grandparents are buried in Montreal because the Russian Empire destroyed the enlightenment in the Crimea and everywhere else they could conquer.
In 1854 Tenny wrote the Charge of the Light Brigade where the 600 went on a suicide mission in Crimea and attacked the Russian Army while they had already lost the war.
The 600 were the elite of British society.
Tennyson wrote an homage to the six hundred.
Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do and die.
What is worth dying for when we have such great linguistic philosophers like Chomsky and Pinker?
One more thing, for the claims of "liberal" media, the tell is in the number of interviews on the major media outlets with Chomsky. That claim is utter bullshit as proven by the answer to that question.
There are myriad issues to discuss here, but I will limit it to the fact that Canada obtained its sovereignty without violence through a series of purely legal actions starting in 1867 and ending in 1982 while the colonists in the lower 13 colonies chose war. Both of our nations are formed from the same European powers, yet we chose different paths to sovereignty. Here are two major tells about the US:
1. For all of the talk of liberty and freedom from the mouths of our founding fathers, they claimed rights for themselves that they denied to their property, black people.
2. We fought communism, that workers control their own lives, as it refuted our belief that wealth indicates competency and moral superiority.
We do consider ourselves THE bright shining city on a hill and that enables myth that both conservative and libertarian Americans can fight for. But libertarians prove their hypocrisy in not fighting against conservatism's attack on rights because it serves their economic interests, which are prized above all as wealth ensures greater privilege, such as they are quite quiet about the conservative infringement on women's rights and the wealthy women will always be able to end an unwanted pregnancy; Libertarians are inherently duplicitous because their concerns are wealth and not rights per se.
BTW, I remember when the Quebec separatist movement was a big deal. For all of our bullshit claims abut English being the "official" language, we have no official language!
I have few disagreements but John Ralston Saul is my Canadian philosopher and The Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson is Canada's only hyphenated Canadian she is a Canadian Canadian.
Might I suggest Saul's The Comeback to understand some of the complexity of our nation.
I know America history better than America's leading historians I learned real American history in school while others listened to all the bull shit from the front of the room.
Benjamin Franklin (Bonhomme Richard ) was second only to Voltaire in the hierarchy of philosophical thought and being a great journalist we know abour Benjamin who son became Governor General of Nova Scotia after the coup.
Franklin was a staunch abolitionist, he was a Deist, he was a scientist, he was a humourist he was a public intellectual, statesman and a globalist.
Needless to say after the coup they sent him to Paris which back then was on the other side of the moon. In 1776 there was the linguistic philosopher Samuel Johnson, the social philosopher the ultra liberal Edmund Burke the Whig and Rousseau was breathing.
Not only slaves were chattel but everything on the land belonged to the people that owned the land. It wasn't the British who owned America but men like Franklin who freed his slaves. It was a deed and your gonads that gave you your humanity in 1776. In Britain the great liberal philosopher Edmond Burke wanted everyone even women to become fully human.
It was East India Company tea dumped in Boston harbour and it was the East Company that ran colonial America. The ships in Boston harbour flew the East India Company flag.
Marx wasn't born but Franklin was a socialist who believed in the same Humanism as Voltaire.
The truth is never simple but the truth is the truth.
In 1688 all of Britain and her empire was democratic and the monarchy lost its power to the parliaments. America was more Magna Carta than the Rights of Man and the land belonged to the Barons.
Try reading the second stanza of Star Spangled Banner it is about the rights of the Barons.
Somethings Scalia knew well he was a gifted sophist who originalism consisted of carrying around Johnson's dictionary.
Did you write this?
"LOL! You're an idiot Trump supporter. Go to hell."
It's in my E-mail but not in the discussion.
You are an A$$ hole for sucking Biden!
Yeah, I did. I deleted it thinking that I'd have something better, but no. Go to hell you Trump supporter, stupid freak.
Your first post was insipid and you've flat-lined since.
But whatever. I sense that you are of a particular ilk that has, as it's greatest (among many) flaws, a complete lack of self-awareness. Award yourself another prize and go away. You win, and the commentary here is improved. Deal?
All of your posts are insipid. Don't post if you have nothing to add to the discussion.