A MarketPlace of Ideas                        

Newt Gingrich in an attempt to garner favor and the love of the popular masses stipulated that MMGW is happening in his debate with John Kerry.

Unfortunately I happen to know to absolute certainty that MMGW is a hoax and most likely Newt also knows this.  But rather than stand his ground on principle he decided to take the slippery way out.  He might have thought that the stampede of lemmings off of the MMGW cliff was unstoppable and thus rather than try to debunk the myth he thought to redirect the herd.

I can understand this sort of tactic when the issue is something of a lovers question.  However in the case of MMGW its simple fact that if you have any sort of an engineering sense and some common sense you know absolutely that its a hoax.  At some point you have to stand up and just tell people they are wrong for their own good.  This case is one of them.   Catering to peoples neurosis’ is not doing anyone any favors.

Newts attempt to deflect the MMGW push towards developing technologies instead of regulation is misguided. This crowd is hellbent on MMGW just exactly because it promises to allow such extremely thick new levels of regulation. Thus Newt has no hope of deflection.

Newt, I used to think you were a contender.  Now I know you’re just another weakling.  You are a weakling when we conservatives are yearning for a giant like Ronald Reagan.  Reagan comprimised because he had to but he never changed the wording of his core beliefs.   That’s a mistake. 

Ichabod Crane?……..Cadaver Don Imus with one foot in the grave

Before MSNBC I had never heard of Don Imus.  I’ve always wondered why he was on MSNBC and presented as a big muckity-muck.  My first impression when I watched him was he was a sallow drunk that made some marginal sense but I don’t look for him to ever be original in the fashion Rush Limbaugh is. Imus just seems to feedback a bunch of stuff with a middle of the road outlook that adds very little to the national conversation.

I assume he’s on the radio because they had alot of time to fill on the network and he was their biggest fish in a biggest little local pond.  Thus grabbing at anything to fill the hole they grabbed Imus.

  Imus’ the Undeads work car:  No one has provided any proof that Imus is actually alive. 

Regarding his nappy comment its only fair he be able to use the same humorous words that other comedians use even if they are black.  Thus his comments about the Rutgers basketball team are fair by comedic usage but I have reservations about applicability.  No fair one person being able to say something on the basis of the color of their skin and someone else not being allowed.  That simply is and always will be R-O-N-G wrong.  Thus if you want to eliminate certain words then eliminate completely…..not selectively.  Better yet leave the words alone and be of good cheer to those people who display they are deserving of good treatment.  Thus the comments about the Rutgers team is off base.  They are a healthy attractive bunch of girls that should be treated as ladies until they prove otherwise.

They look pretty healthy to me.  I hope their feelings aren’t hurt.  The best revenge is living well and it appears they are. ( in contrast to drink your lunch Imus )

Thus I conclude that Imus should not be removed from the airwaves due to his nappy comment.  I conclude he should be removed because who gives a flying fudge about what he has to say.

I guess I just have it in for posers who wear cowboy hats.  Hats of any of the costume variety make my phoney alerting klaxon go off.

Hey Imus, the Egyptians are calling and they want their mummy back! I think its assuming alot to think just because it talks it alive.  He could be mummified remains rigged up to be a cadaver puppet with Rich Little doing the voice.

  …….mmmmm donuts!

 The logic of any situation if valid should manifest itself as an unbroken toroidal donut of self consistant logic.  You must be able to to complete lap after lap and not encounter any contradictions or the entire donut of logic is faulty. 

In mathematics you can prove something by method of contradiction.  For example you assume something is true. Flowing from this assumption is a conclusion that can be proved given the assumption. 

One of the first proofs by contradiction is the following gem attributed to Euclid.

Theorem. There are infinitely many prime numbers.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that there are only finitely many prime numbers, and all of them are listed as follows: p₁, p₂ …, p_n. Consider the number q = p₁p₂… p_n + 1. This number is not divisible by any of the listed primes since if we divided p_i into q, there would result a remainder of 1 for each i = 1, 2, …, n. Well then, we must conclude that q is a prime number, not among the primes listed above, contradicting our assumption that all primes are in the list p₁, p₂ …, p_n.

Proof by contradiction is often used when you wish to prove the impossibility of something. You assume it is possible, and then reach a contradiction. In the examples below we use this idea to prove the impossibility of certain kinds of solutions to some equations.

Thus when you find 1 thing that is impossible on your donut of logic, the whole donut should be tossed as its broken.  Now you may be asking yourself “is this of any use in the real world?”  The answer is a great farkin big YES.

Let’s say you are going to church and your pastor always wears mirror sunglasses during the sermons. While all else in the situation may seem kosher this should be enough to bite a great big gap in your donut and tell you that something is wrong.  Imbalanced people show their hands in myriad ways and the inappropriate nature of mirror sunglasses on a preacher during a sermon is one of them.  Thus independent thinking based on cold cruel logic can save your life.  Had I ever been to one of Jim Jone’s sermons I would have never returned as every video clip on TV I have ever seen of him he had on mirror sunglasses.  Yet 909 people decided that critical thinking was not important and went to their deaths.  While this is a famous and noteworthy case this sort of thing happens everyday.  Millions of people die everyday from incareful analysis and bad decisions.  Decisions so banal that you never hear of them because the information factory that is the news media finds no angle to sell it to you with. Thus it goes unheard.

If you work hard you’ll find all human behavoir can be described by mathematics and logic to some degree of usefulness.  If you are sophisticated enough it can get you alot of dates and subsquently sex.  But then the mechanical nature will make it less enjoyable. However that’s just a pathway to great enlightenment as the paradox is the more mechanical your thought is the more you can know when to not behave mechanically.  Thus you appreciate and understand your fundamental nature, the miracle that is life and can make decisions that enhance.

I have a friend that is a liberal and thinks like a liberal.  A long while back we had this discussion:

Andy: PBS is great we need to fund it through the government

Me: If PBS is so great we can defund it and people will contribute enough to keep it on the air

Andy: Nooo, we need to fund it otherwise it won’t exist.

Me: Oh well if we must fund it people must not think its that great

Andy: PBS is great

Me: Then why must we fund it governmentally.  As it stands now they have no reason to react to those who watch it.  Thus it probably isn’t that great.

Andy: PBS is great

Obviously Andy is a liberal kool aid drinker.  No critical thinking pathway to be found in any of his words. Just a faulty open toroid donut of bad logic.

What’s typical about liberals is that they just don’t ever seem to master using the tool of logic.  Their mastery is limited to the minimum logic it takes to self rationalize forcing everyone to do and support what they want.  Thus to this day my tax dollars support a propaganda organ of the government called PBS and NPR-Public Radio.  These are the saddest of comment about our so called “free society”.   When I watch / listen to either of these I hear the same sort of party line that you used to hear out of Radio Moscow.  If only told NPR/ PBS were publicly funded by congress voting for the bucks I could safely deduce PBS / NPR would be party hacks even before listening.  After listening one realizes its worse than predicted from the funding dynamic !

While its obvious that PBS is run by lefty liberal / dem party / socialist / communists ( all the same thing in reality ) we now see evidence of blatant censoring coming to light.  A documentary about moderate islamic peoples being targeted by radical islamic elements has been rejected for airing.  The documentary was originally funded by PBS and then subsequently eliminated from the crossroads series.  Arty Exerpt below:

Martyn Burke says that the Public Broadcasting Service and project managers at station WETA in Washington, D.C., excluded his documentary, Islam vs. Islamists, from the series America at a Crossroads after he refused to fire two co-producers affiliated with a conservative think tank.

Entire arty here.

A second arty with more details here.

Axiom:   Everyone has a bias and it creeps into everything written and filmed.  Nothing is objective. Its a mathematical impossibility.   Learn this lesson to be an effective thinker.  Its one of the only truly objective thoughts in a human head.

After reading the article linked above I can only conclude that the left and PBS find the radical islamic cause one they are attempting to harness as a way of destroying the current order of the world.  The liberal / dem party / socialist / communist types have always pushed in the direction of chaos because its with chaos they can insert their changes into society at large.  The cost in damage to peoples lives is immense but their egos are such they can self justify it.  I find them morally reprehensible.   They will do and say anything for power.  Not a partner I’d have in a business deal. 

For this reason I urgently suggest to you that you should never donate money to either PBS or NPR. 

PBS can prove they are fair to opposing points of view and committed to allowing the full range of human thought be expressed.  A good start towards doing this would be airing Islam vs. Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center   and The Great Global Warming Swindle.   These are 2 programs that very definitely disagree with their point of view.  If their ideas are strong enough they will weather the showing of these.  If their ideas are weak they will not.  I suspect they know their ideas are weak or they would not be so resistant.