Dream Not Of Today - Latest Comments

Re: Exaggerating Sporks

gohlkusmaximus — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 18:44:39 -0000

"Shitload of sporks" -- I love it! The picture I took (because the prior wikipedia photo of a spork was horrible) lives on, and undoubtedly it will outlive me.

Re: Good Riddance to the American Media

Jacob — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 01:17:54 -0000

What makes you think that the story reported by the London paper was accurate or verified as accurate?

By the way, if you have such a big problem with the USA then you are encouraged to move to some gay ass country that celebrates sodomy and drug use like the Netherlands. Yeah, that's a good place to live for someone that is childless and completely self-centered and treats as serious news unverified reports from British newspapers that probably get their info from Taliban propaganda outlets.

Just sayin.

Re: A (d)ecade of Fail

Rob Spectre — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:07:13 -0000

I don't believe that is an accurate representation of our age.

I think were the foundations of this nation, this planet, and the increasingly global civilization that inhabits it were solid, surely we all would have come together when faced with the increasingly severe perils that were thrown our way this past ten years. It would be a great story to write, one of indefatigable perseverance and indomitable spirit. How the whole world came together when as we looked over the brink, and through a newfound unity pulled humanity forward to progress a common cause.

The only problem is - for the reasons I will describe in the next couple weeks - that's just not what happened.

Re: A (d)ecade of Fail

ProvRI — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:34:22 -0000

Oh, boo. You're taking the easy way out, my friend. Nobody cold possibly argue that the past decade, as CNN dubbed it, was likely one of the worst decades we've experienced across the board, for a whole host of reasons. I think you're better then that). I challenge you to instead explore how so many managed to persevere in spite of. How many of us did manage to carry on, displaying strength, unity, courage, and found the strength, wisdom and a different sort of success that could only be brought forth and measured under the duress of the past decade's tests. Tell those stories. Explore hope, not fear.

Re: Ordinary People

Robert Taylor — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:07:36 -0000

"The Christianity born that night isn’t about divinity. It’s about humanity."
I really enjoyed reading this, a very poetic piece.
I'm an atheist, but I am drawn to the philosophical wisdom of the Gospels, and the ancient power of myth to help guide us in ethical and moral dilemmas.
Unfortunately, religion has taken us away from philosophy for the worse, as religion demands submission, while philosophy demands reason and our rational minds.

Re: Polluting The Language In Copenhagen

Robert Taylor — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:59:59 -0000

I will definitely concede to you that human action has had some terrible repercussions upon the environment, and that of course we should all be good stewards of our land, air, and seas. But it is way too important to be tackled by government, whose only tools are violence and coercion. Intimate problems like these can not and will not be solved by the state.
I think advocates of government-run solutions to vital problems are dangerously naive in their assumption that the state "serves the public interest" and not the interests of itself and whatever leeches have attached themselves to government power. For example, the "Clean Air Act" was a one-size-fits-all national policy that benefited the dirty West Virginia coal plants (and their loyal unions) over the west coast's cleaner ones.
Putting the environment-raping, polluting, and destructive government in charge of "saving" the environment is like letting the inmates run the prison.
A history of private-property rights on the other hand, as I tried to show in the article, suggests that there is far less pollution and environmental degradation when property is held by free individuals.
And I am confused of this "free enterprise" that you speak of. An economy with taxes, licensing, regulation, fines, inspections, monitoring, restricting, dictating, subsidizing is not a market economy.

Re: Meet Me at the Christmas Tree This Year

ProvRI — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:44:35 -0000

Here I am thinking high-end custom guitar shops, plus the major music retailers (though I think they've all since been bought up by GC...), all lumped together in this glorious avenue of rock....

....and you're thinking -cider-. From -Starbucks- no less. Have you truly fallen so far?

Re: Polluting The Language In Copenhagen

Rob Spectre — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:19:20 -0000

This argument is a little silly. Yes, CO2 is required for photosynthesis and a number of other crucial processes that keep our biosphere in balance, but the key word there is *balance*. It cannot be credibly claimed that the sixty fold increase in CO2 in our atmosphere in the past forty years is harmless or natural (http://www.ferdinand-engelb....

Suggesting that carbon emissions shouldn't be capped because CO2 is chemically critical to plants is like saying cyanide isn't poisonous because it is found in apple seeds. Suggesting government regulation of those emissions will result in a police state is like saying like killing the panhandler who shot up Times Square yesterday will result in every gun being confiscated in the United States.

Dramatically reducing our carbon emissions is crucial to saving this planet and free enterprise has demonstrated for almost half a century that it has no interest in doing it.

Industry depends on balance too.

Re: Meet Me at the Christmas Tree This Year

Rob Spectre — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:06:23 -0000

Indeed I did - grabbed some cider at a Starbucks on that street as a matter of fact.

Re: Meet Me at the Christmas Tree This Year

ProvRI — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:53:18 -0000

Did you hit 48th St? If not, shame. Shame!

Re: His Fervent Prayer

Daniel Austin Hoherd — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:52:34 -0000

Damn dude, I wish I could be in NYC with you! One of these days...

Re: The Real Crime of Katrina

Robert Taylor — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:09:18 -0000

The Army Corps of Engineers fortified New Orleans after the British tried to seize it during the War of 1812, but the city and territory itself was created by the efforts of private individuals going back at least to the early 18th century. the port of New Orleans was one of the busiest ports in the US, and was governed by the peaceful elements of commerce and trade.
My attack on the gun-confiscation at New Orleans was indeed a jab at the logic of gun control but my overall attempt was to show the gross mismanagement inherent in any state function. Herding over 10,000 people, like cattles, into a stadium was probably not the greatest idea in my opinion. Before we had the mega-state that exists in America today, there are plenty of examples of natural disasters (Chicago Fire of 1873, the Johnstown Flood of 1889, the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906) being handled far better by individuals and the great work of private charities and volunteers. This is because the growth of a state tends to create a sense of dependency, whether its education, defense, or floods.

Re: The Real Crime of Katrina

Rob Spectre — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:05:06 -0000

Let's not forget the city of New Orleans would not even exist with the Army Corps of Engineers and many other instruments of state and federal government. The entire region was shaped by public, not private, resources.

Re: The Real Crime of Katrina

Hala Furst — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:03:37 -0000

Ok, even I will grant you that the confiscation of fire arms in private homes was a gross overreaching of police power. But, I do not see a logical through line between that argument and the mismanagement of other government services. Are you positing that an armed populace would have done a better job of addressing the needs of the citizens harmed by Katrina, or are you just getting in a 2nd Amendment jab while making collateral points?

Moreover, can you really, really argue that weapons in the Superdome would have been a good idea? Not arguing through hindsight, and saying that perhaps some of the people who were raped or mugged while there would have been protected by private weapons, but by putting yourself in the moment. Thousands of angry, confused, scared, and recently-homeless individuals are being pent up for God knows how long. Do you really, even in your most libertarian of hearts, believe that thinking people would have made any decision other than to keep guns out of there?

Re: Obama’s Okinawa Problem

Robert Taylor — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:13:43 -0000

Thank you, Justin! You are making a lot of sense. We should definitely disband the military, since the existence of a professional military is the absolute death of liberty; it is the germ of every political disease.
When Robert MacNamara asked a Japanese general if they had any plans to invade the US, the Japanese general laughed out loud and said, "Of course not, their would be a rifle behind every blade of grass!"
This anecdote represents the best and only moral form of national defense there is: the people themselves. You ever wonder why Hitler never invaded the Swiss, despite the fact he wanted to be known as the "butcher of the Swiss?" Because they have a highly decentralized political system, and every single adult is armed to the teeth.* They also had booby traps set on major bridges and roads, and Hitler realized that it would be far too expensive to invade. We need rifles in every home, not a trillion dollar "defense" budget.
As for the "we'd all be speaking German argument," did occupied France speak German? Poland? Czech? No.
And as for thanking those who served, never. I don't blame the soldiers who thought they were serving their country when they were/are only serving the state, but here is an important question: if it is wrong for me or you to kill, why is it okay to do it while wearing a government uniform?

*and there's a low crime rate, peace, and prosperity. One more anecdote: during WW2, the Swiss had a 500,000 man militia ready if anyone was stupid enough to invade. When one of top Hitler's generals asked the Swiss president what they would do if Hitler invaded with a million men, the Swiss pres said they would shoot twice and go home. THAT is defense.

Re: Obama’s Okinawa Problem

justin_borden — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:45:48 -0000

Let us just see what would happen if we pulled all troops back home discharged them, cause we dont have a war here. hell why stop there lets just disband the millitary as a whole we are on a content basically be ourselves what do we have to fear from other countrys... oh yea they have planes ships and bomb that can reach anywhere in the country. Do like wheat bread let them blow up kansas there is nothing there dont like gay marrage blow up New Hampshire. We need the service members that are abroad as well as here. You should thank one some time cause hell you could be japanses right now if it were not for them. OR maybe german but then we would have some good beer and brats. I do agree that Obama ahould step to the plate and do something. He cant ride the blame Bush train if he wants to stay in office for 8 years.

Re: Obama’s Okinawa Problem

Robert Taylor — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:44:21 -0000

Japan may have struck first, but like every US war, they were provoked. The US had control of the Philippines and had them surrounded in the Pacific, were selling China planes that were killing Japanese, and imposed a cruel oil embargo on them. Japan, in desperation, attacks a US colony at Hawaii, an island much closer to Japan than to us. FDR got the war he wanted, and lied over and over again to do so ("Human Smoke" has a great pacifist look at the beginnings of WW2).
We have nothing to fear from China. In their long history, they have been the victims of invasion and have rarely if ever been imperial. The more we trade with them the better, because as the great Frederic Bastiat said, "if goods don't cross borders, soldiers will." If you look at any period of peace in history, it has been achieve by the spread of trade and (non-state funded) markets.
Japan is one of the richest countries in the world; it can easily defend itself. And what about the 50,000 troops we have stationed in South Korea just waiting to be tripwired inches off of China's borders? It seems to me these Asian deployments are nothing more than provocations for more conflict; and more conflict equals more F-22s to sell and an excuse to justify the garrisoning of the globe.
There is no reason, strategic or otherwise, to EVER deploy US troops on foreign soil.

Re: Obama’s Okinawa Problem

Robert Taylor — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:27:58 -0000

Re: Obama’s Okinawa Problem

Rob Spectre — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:11:23 -0000

I still don't think we can qualify the war with Japan as "unnecessary." For the many things that one could say in our conduct of the war that followed, it remains irrefutable that they attacked first.

One thing to consider with our troops in Japan - they are right next to one billion Chinese with a couple hundred generations of animosity. I think the small provisional force we maintain there is one of our few deployments that make strategic sense.

Re: How to Find a Pint

Swing Trading — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:10:35 -0000

Interesting post. I have made a twitter post about this. My friends will enjoy reading it also.

Re: Rival Schools

Teaching English in Taiwan — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:27:00 -0000

Interesting post. I have just bookmarked this at stumbleupon. Others no doubt will like it like I did.

Re: Public Service Announcement

justin_borden — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:42:46 -0000

I am with you on that 260 million can buy anything
there should be a salary cap in baseball then that might lvl the playing feild a bit. there is no excuse for that kind of money to be spent just because you are in the largest market in the country what about teams like tampa bay. royals, washington, toranto, and you cant forget the best small market team in base ball the Twins. to be able to come back form 7 games down in september to win a division with out the main guy Justin Mornue. Although they did have maur with the batting title and should hands down the mvp.

Re: A Tale of Two Upgrades

manny — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 10:29:08 -0000

nice comparison

i will still get a beer tho

Re: A Vile Uniquely Human

Robert Taylor — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:05:58 -0000

TDub,

I take it very personally that you would compare me to somebody like Glenn Beck, who is in love with the state as long as a Republican is president.

When I say that education is run by the "guns of the state," I mean that education is funded by state coercion against every individual who happens to live in that certain area. The government is nothing more than the power of brute force, and when an institution like education is run by violence, it should be opposed on this moral level.
For the utilitarian argument, all we have to do is look at the results that government education brings. It costs more and more every year, and we get less and less of it.
You are right by pointing out that education ultimately begins with the parents at home and the community, and any functioning education system has to have both elements. The important point is that all of these steps should be the product of free and voluntary associations.
Before we had a giant Leviathan state governing nearly every aspect of our lives, the US had thousands of voluntary guilds, unions, and groups that worked to address the complex and delicate problems that plague society (read "From Mutual Aid to the Welfare State: Fraternal Societies and Social Services, 1890-1967," a life-changing book), and they were dealt with in a far better (and moral) way.
I am guessing you believe there should be government education, and though I vehemently disagree, I would never dream of using coercion against you to enforce my opinion. Would you give me, and others, the same respect?

Re: A Tale of Two Upgrades

warzauwynn — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:46:01 -0000

I dreamed about penguins the other night. It was a prophesy! Maybe I should get an ubuntu colored tuxedo to celebrate!