Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

But . . . What About the Pensions? [Dan Collins]

Via David Thompson, The Guardian wishes you and yours Happy Holidays:

Dreams of a planet unblemished by humanity are in fact remarkably common, at least in certain quarters. The “biocentric” conservationist Paul Watson is happy to describe humanity as a “cancer” and tells us that, while vegan diets are a good thing, “curing the biosphere of the human virus will require a radical and invasive approach.” Readers may recall another environmental crusader, Dr John Reid (mentioned here), whose plan to save the world from human beings entails putting “something in the water” – specifically, “a virus that would… make a substantial proportion of the population infertile.” And while the good doctor is happy to share his view of all human life as an extraneous infestation of an otherwise pristine Earth, he’s also insistent that “affluent populations should be targeted first.”

Last year, the Optimum Population Trust published a briefing paper, A Population-Based Climate Strategy, in which it was argued that couples having two children instead of three would reduce that family’s carbon dioxide output by the “equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.” The OPT regards population growth as a “failure of courage and leadership” and mulls, albeit hesitantly, on the need for “intervention by the state… in individual freedoms for the foreseeable future.” OPT co-chairman, Professor John Guillebaud, claims: “The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”

Mr Dammann isn’t entirely disapproving of such notions:

The followers of [VHEMT] take to its logical conclusion the observation that the population growth of the human species is unsustainable. Rather than waiting for nature to extinguish us by itself, which process will almost inevitably involve the destruction of many other species besides, we should initiate proceedings ourselves by refusing to have any more children… [T]here is something magnificent about the thought of an entire species simply switching itself off, without violence or force of anything other than will, to make way for something more lasting. It is unthinkable within the system of nature, unless as the conscious, involuntary corollary to a process that may be occurring anyway. But the absurdity lies not in the aim, which is in many ways laudable, but in the idea that the compassionate motivation in which it originates could possibly see the project through.

The problem, then, is not the premise of voluntary self-eradication, but merely its impracticality.

418 Replies to “But . . . What About the Pensions? [Dan Collins]”

  1. N. O'Brain says:

    You first, dude, we’re right behind you.

  2. Dan Collins says:

    And everyone else at The Lemmings Institute.

  3. carol says:

    So basically the solution to humanity is killself.

    It’s just denatured, amnesiac, self-abnegating Christian altruism – The Final Stages.

  4. Sdferr says:

    One must surely marvel at the awesome wisdom possessed by those who know with precision what it is that constitutes the good health of the Earth’s biosphere. They’re God-like beings. Truly.

  5. N. O'Brain says:

    There’s nothing Christian about suicide, either individually or racially.

  6. Lt. York says:

    Yeah, them first. I’ll even volunteer to help them, if that is what they really wish.
    Perhaps I’ll need a disclaimer or a waiver or something…

  7. SarahW says:

    People do such weird and destructive things in pursuit of purity.

  8. Sdferr says:

    Islam, for one.

  9. Ric Locke says:

    In response to VHEMT, I hereby announce the founding of GRASS: Go Right Ahead, Silly Sonsabitches.

    Donations welcome.

    Regards,
    Ric

  10. MAJ (P) John says:

    Ric, Paypal or Amazon? How about a bottle of Dalwhinnie, in-kind?

  11. Carin says:

    There have always been loonies. It’s just funny that today anyone takes the loonies seriously.

  12. Jeffersonian says:

    Are we sure we won WWII? I’m gonna go look it up.

  13. Mr. Pink says:

    Well Blago is announcing his pick for O!’s old senate seat. He is a balsy guy I give him that.

  14. kelly says:

    I’d like to see these people convince the Muslems first.

  15. Mossberg500 says:

    Comment by Mr. Pink on 12/30 @ 12:28 pm #

    Well Blago is announcing his pick for O!’s old senate seat. He is a balsy guy I give him that.

    Blago must have conducted his own internal self-exonerating investigation.

  16. cranky-d says:

    And once humans are gone, then what? Gaia can continue without our interference I guess.

    If they dislike humans so much they can feel free to extinguish themselves at their convenience.

  17. Jeffersonian says:

    So is this guy cheering on the Israelis right now?

  18. Mossberg500 says:

    Comment by Jeffersonian on 12/30 @ 12:55 pm #

    So is this guy cheering on the Israelis right now?

    Yeah, why all the fuss over wars, genocides, pandemics and famines? Environiwits should be promoting human disasters. Gangreen[sic] will be the new fad.

  19. dicentra says:

    People do such weird and destructive things in pursuit of purity.

    I read David’s post yesterday and I couldn’t help but think that these people are like anorexics: thin is never thin enough; you have to keep going until you’ve made yourself — your worthless, filthy self — vanish from off the face of the earth so that the cosmos no longer has to endure your disgusting existence.

    If I’m not mistaken, the Borg got started as a collective quest for perfection, and see where that led? To Seven-of-Nine, that’s where.

    I mean…

    O, never mind.

  20. Mr. Pink says:

    Yeah that is a great idea. He should just investigate himself, exonerate himself, and then have the press just repeat it just like Obama. That is the ticket.

  21. There’s a reason the book Rainbow Six has not, and I expect will not ever be made into a movie – at least not retaining its original plot.

  22. thor says:

    What happened to Bristol Palin’s crack baby’s thread?

    It’s like Bristol Palin’s plans to finish high school, like her pending marriage, like her mother-in-law’s small business, like Russia on a foggy morning viewed from Sarah Palin’s porch – it just disappeared!

    Ain’t right!

  23. Dan Collins says:

    Fuck it, man. I’m only posting on Major John approved topics.

  24. thor says:

    Didn’t Goldstein ban any reference to any Tom Clancy text long ago? I think I remember he did.

  25. mojo says:

    “You first…”

  26. B Moe says:

    Isn’t there some road kill somewhere you could be rolling in, thor?

  27. MAJ (P) John says:

    Oh calm down Mr. Collins :)

  28. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 1:53 pm #

    What happened to Bristol Palin’s crack baby’s thread?”

    Everybody was wondering if you had stopped molesting young boys.

  29. Kevin B says:

    What these arseholes fail to appreciate is that the planet is not here to look pretty.

    All the pretty flowers, plants, trees, butterflies, birds, animals, fish, cetaceans and everything else that makes up life on what otherwise would be an empty ball of rock, are trying desperately to achieve the kind of mastery over their environment that man posseses.

    The fact that humankind has evolved/been gifted by god, (delete as appropriate to your beliefs), the level of wit and intelligence necessary to have some kind of control over the environment he lives should be celebrated as a triumph of said evolution/god, not a disaster.

    Just because their puny aesthetic sense fails to appreciate the beauty of urban sprawl, a municipal landfill or a fully operational power station doesn’t give them the right to advocate genocide, and if, by accident or the malevolent design of ‘nature lovers’ like these, humanity should die out, do they seriously believe that ‘Mother Gaia’ will get it ‘right’ next time and that the new dominant species* will be benign, peace-loving, vegans?

    Give me a break!

    *My money’s on the ursines.

  30. thor says:

    Well it is mid-winter in Palin-land. You know what that means. Every Sarah Palin moose-mom is giving tantalizing lectures to their daughters about the delicacies of the upcoming springtime snapper bloom. A young Wasillian strumpet learns from their mommies to pace the unfurling of those multi-layers of moose pelt underwear one layer at a time until it’s safe. After nine months of hibernation if the warm Spring air suddenly hits a raw Wasllian snapper, yow-ouch! That sort of gas-oxygen combustion can have deadly effects, even to those in merely close proximity. Boom!

  31. MAJ (P) John says:

    Mr. Collins – see what I mean?

  32. N. O'Brain says:

    Maj, my conclusion is that he’s insane.

  33. Dan Collins says:

    You’re not really advocating that I stop posting about some topics because of that, are you? Peace in our time?

  34. JJ says:

    This makes sense, actually, becasue I don’t know one – not ONE – environmentalist that doesn’t advocate the voluntary extinction of mankind.

    Finally a little honesty.

  35. B Moe says:

    Its a consensus.

  36. JJ says:

    It’s a pretty large consensus, because I’ve yet to meet an environmentalist that does not advocate extinction.

  37. N. O'Brain says:

    “Obviously the only rational solution to your problem is suicide.”

  38. MAJ (P) John says:

    #33 – no, just bolstering my point that a limited amount of monomania inducing posts would be nice.

  39. thor says:

    Bristol Lapped
    by thor

    Named after a speedway on the wrong part of town.
    Bristol had a party once, men came from miles around.

    Things she’d never understand about her hometown.
    What’s the “big darn deal” if everyone gets a reach a’round.

  40. Dan Collins says:

    Treating me rudely, then referring to me as “Mr. Collins” doesn’t work for me, Major John. You’d be surprised, I think, to discover just how serious a person I am. And I tend to be most serious when I appear most facetious, as well.

    You want me to be earnest? That’s like a death sentence.

  41. kelly says:

    Don’t you have an open sewer to wallow in or something, thor?

  42. MAJ (P) John says:

    Rudely? I just asked for a limit on posts. Cripes, why so sensitive?

    I don’t care about earnest or not – but another 200 thor posts on Palin pooter/moose tits, etc. isn’t exactly what the masses are clamoring for.

    Obviously Jeff has left you the keys, so you can do as you will.

  43. B Moe says:

    I think we should just go ahead and let thor have his way and close the fucking site down. I mean he just bought hisself a MFA, he is far too smart for the rest of us.

  44. Dan Collins says:

    Sensitive? I’m a sociopath.

  45. MAJ (P) John says:

    #44 – I thought that was only wave-sweeping-away related sociopathy?

  46. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    Speaking of Jeff. When is he coming back? Anyone know? BTW, Dan, I tried a new Magic Hat beer. The Odd Notion Winter. A great, great beer.

  47. Dan Collins says:

    OI, I haven’t tried that one. Thanks. I don’t know about Jeff. I do know his mom-in-law was around. I’ve got a houseguest . . . my Romanian friend, Mircea.

    Major John, don’t worry about it.

  48. mojo says:

    Bog save us from earnest wise-asses, Dan.

  49. thor says:

    Dan has never been accused in the unsolved cases of those highway girls disappearances. I don’t even think he’s a suspect. Not that I know where the fish are buried! Or of the deeper meanings to Dan’s Beckettian-Irish quatrain’s tales of the greening of the Vermontillian underbush! Not me, nunca, nekogda, never, officer.

  50. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 2:27 pm #

    Bristol Lapped
    by thor

    Named after a speedway on the wrong part of town.
    Bristol had a party once, men came from miles around.

    Things she’d never understand about her hometown.
    What’s the “big darn deal” if everyone gets a reach a’round.

    You do understand that that’s a real person you’re talking about, right? Someone who didn’t ask to be thrown around as a political prop? You do understand that the elections over and you can stop the horrible behavior, right? You get that continuing to talk about a girl you’ve never met in this fashion says really ugly things about your character, right?

    Or do cheap political points and petty irritations really justify any sort of vitriol so long as it smacks down those “damned redumblicans?”

    I forget where I heard this (and I believe I’m paraphrasing), but I’ve heard it said that good or evil aren’t just determined by one’s goals, but by what you’re willing to do to attain them. Makes me wonder, when people act this way, exactly what that says about them. Sociopathy on display, enabled by the anonymity of the Internet?

  51. thor says:

    Do I know who I’m talking about? Yes, why yes I do. She’s from a patriotic family, the kind the point at others who are not patriotic a’tall! Terrorist lover pal’a’rounders, you gotta call’em out!

    I even seen pictures of her, dare I admit I read young Levi Johnson’s autobiographical narratives from his former myspace.com page. Though duly impressed with eachs youthful exubberence, I don’t think at this point Bristol is likely to be the first Wasillian President of Harvard Law Review, but that’s just my guess.

  52. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 3:14 pm #
    Do I know who I’m talking about? Yes, why yes I do. She’s from a patriotic family, the kind the point at others who are not patriotic a’tall! Terrorist lover pal’a’rounders, you gotta call’em out!

    I even seen pictures of her, dare I admit I read young Levi Johnson’s autobiographical narratives from his former myspace.com page. Though duly impressed with eachs youthful exubberence, I don’t think at this point Bristol is likely to be the first Wasillian President of Harvard Law Review, but that’s just my guess.

    Why are you incapable of giving Palin’s kids the same treatment given to Obama’s kids? Why are saying such things about such a young girl who never asked to be in the spotlight? What possible purpose does it serve? FFS, they’re kids. I thought wingnuts were supposed to be the ones willing to do anything to attain power and political points.

  53. JohnAnnArbor says:

    Squanto taught the Pilgrims about burying fish for fertilizer, you see.

    As to the rest, it sounds like thor’s got steam coming out of its ears because (yet again) we don’t resemble the stereotype in its addled mind.

  54. thor says:

    Comment by TheUnrepentantGeek on 12/30 @ 3:00 pm #

    Or do cheap political points and petty irritations really justify any sort of vitriol so long as it smacks down those “damned redumblicans corrupt, uneducated, bigots from Alaska?”

    Call me the breeze, or the “fixer.”

    White trash certainly might be an ever growing percantage of the ever declining redumblican party but surely you’ve heard of William F. Buckley Jr., George Will, Chistopher Hitchens and Peggy Noonan, and so many others, have you not?

  55. B Moe says:

    As to the rest, it sounds like thor’s got steam coming out of its ears because (yet again) we don’t resemble the stereotype in its addled mind.

    Nah, he is pissed because he paid good Goddamn money for that MFA in literature and still couldn’t win a Porta-John graffiti contest.

  56. Ric Locke says:

    Geek, the Palins scare the crap out of thor, as does anybody with actual connections to the Real World®. Contra Major John, we need more posts about the Palin family. Maybe we can induce a coronary and be rid of the bastard.

    Regards,
    Ric

  57. N. O'Brain says:

    “Maybe we can induce a coronary and be rid of the bastard.”

    I still want him to fall into an open manhole.

  58. N. O'Brain says:

    Think of the poetic justice: a shit among the shit.

  59. parsnip says:

    Oh please, Ric, let Palin drive the Republicans off the cliff one more time.

    She’s soooooooscary!

  60. JohnAnnArbor says:

    Speaking of fish and Alaska, not all salmon are created equal. My grandfather was up there while he was in the Army in the ’50s. His unit caught some salmon and cooked it up, thinking it was pretty good. Later, the local Indians told them that that variety of salmon is what they fed their dogs!

    This non-sequitur provided by the Midwest: still here, amazingly enough.

  61. thor says:

    Comment by TheUnrepentantGeek on 12/30 @ 3:19 pm #

    Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 3:14 pm #
    Do I know who I’m talking about? Yes, why yes I do. She’s from a patriotic family, the kind the point at others who are not patriotic a’tall! Terrorist lover pal’a’rounders, you gotta call’em out!

    I even seen pictures of her, dare I admit I read young Levi Johnson’s autobiographical narratives from his former myspace.com page. Though duly impressed with eachs youthful exubberence, I don’t think at this point Bristol is likely to be the first Wasillian President of Harvard Law Review, but that’s just my guess.

    Why are you incapable of giving Palin’s kids the same treatment given to Obama’s kids? Why are saying such things about such a young girl who never asked to be in the spotlight? What possible purpose does it serve? FFS, they’re kids. I thought wingnuts were supposed to be the ones willing to do anything to attain power and political points.

    Oh wee moosey gassser, Obama’s girls weren’t knocked up by a boy whose mommy sells dope, now were they. And what would a low-class bigot like you say if they had been? But you’re not a wacist!

    Attempting to foist that empty-headed Alaskan mayor on the American people as a qualified candidate for VP was the definitive winger line. Any coward who went along with that is a most unpatriotic sot in my book and no goddamned American at all, just a weasel-fuckin’ redumblican. To Mexico with you bendejos. Go filch tax-pyers money in taco-land.

  62. thor says:

    Comment by B Moe on 12/30 @ 3:26 pm #

    As to the rest, it sounds like thor’s got steam coming out of its ears because (yet again) we don’t resemble the stereotype in its addled mind.

    Nah, he is pissed because he paid good Goddamn money for that MFA in literature and still couldn’t win a Porta-John graffiti contest.

    Port’a-Johns are no place for graffitti. Public crappers are where redumblicans date.

  63. JohnAnnArbor says:

    …therefore demonstrating more of that famous tolerance for differing viewpoints I keep hearing about.

    Still, the amount of anger invested in it is really amazing.

  64. Dan Collins says:

    That’s true, JAA. I worked the salmon fishery a couple of summers when I was in college, out of Valdez (before the oil spill). The Chinook were the worst. Soggy flesh even before they hit the cannery.

  65. serr8d says:

    Nah, he is pissed because he paid good Goddamn money for that MFA in literature and still couldn’t win a Porta-John graffiti contest.

    I think thor’s MFA was bought and paid for by Daddy, B Moe.

    Poor guy, he’s still trying to buy himself some intelligent offspring.

  66. JohnAnnArbor says:

    I’ve heard that’s tough work, Dan.

  67. N. O'Brain says:

    “Still, the amount of anger invested in it is really amazing.”

    Bile and hate and mindless malignancy, that’s what little thors are made of.

  68. JohnAnnArbor says:

    I know a guy who has a double bachelor’s degree. Fine art and philosophy.

    I haven’t heard from him in a while. Wonder what he does.

  69. JohnAnnArbor says:

    Bile and hate and mindless malignancy, that’s what little thors are made of.

    There are a certain subset of people, regardless of politics, that are prone to such things. I imagine the psychologists have a name for it and everything.

  70. N. O'Brain says:

    Found the perfect shirt for all the reactionary left pinheads out there (I’m looking at you, thor)

    http://chrisbishop.com/obama/

  71. serr8d says:

    Dan, that was a good commercial.

  72. N. O'Brain says:

    Sorry, that was via

    http://www.rightwingnews.com/

  73. Ric Locke says:

    She’s soooooooscary!

    Therefore you — self-declared as an opponent of all we represent — must go to superhuman effort to warn us off, right?

    Ummmm….

    Regards,
    Ric

  74. serr8d says:

    N.O’Brain, did you notice Chris Bishop’s AIM account name? armadilloxy

  75. parsnip says:

    Actually Ric,

    I kinda miss Palin and her wacky way of talking and would enjoy seeing her do her chicken dance one more time.

    But I don’t think Obama should have it that easy next time around.

  76. geoffb says:

    If the British Minister for Culture gets his way thor would be able by his posts alone to shut down a web site or at least have it rated XXX.

  77. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    Oh wee moosey gassser, Obama’s girls weren’t knocked up by a boy whose mommy sells dope, now were they. And what would a low-class bigot like you say if they had been? But you’re not a wacist!

    Attempting to foist that empty-headed Alaskan mayor on the American people as a qualified candidate for VP was the definitive winger line. Any coward who went along with that is a most unpatriotic sot in my book and no goddamned American at all, just a weasel-fuckin’ redumblican. To Mexico with you bendejos. Go filch tax-pyers money in taco-land.

    Do you really find patriotism to be a particular virtue? I thought leftists described it as the preference of geography over morality?

    How do you know Governor Palin was “empty headed?” Do you have the results of an objective intelligence test in your possession? Do you have her college or highschool transcripts? Or is disagreeing with you a sufficient metric for intelligence in your eyes?

    Why does Bristol’s sexual activity make her an acceptable target for vitriol and ridicule? I thought the left were tolerant of people’s lifestyle choices? Do you really need to compromise your own values (assuming you have any) just to point out “TEH HYPOCRISY!!1!”?

    And what makes me a low class bigot? The fact that I take exception to your treatment of a young girl you don’t even know who never ran for anything and didn’t ask to be in the public eye? Are you truly willing to do or say anything to your political opponents or people you classify as outgroup enough to be unacceptable?

    And, for your information, I doubt I would have said much at all had Obamas girls gotten pregnant (aside from expressing alarm at how it happened – since I’m not even sure they’re past puberty – but then I’m not into oppo research designed to humiliate minors unrelated to the campaign). You see, I’m not like you. The personal is not political for me.

    Obviously you’re not willing to discuss anything in good faith, and would rather toss bombs and insults with no basis in fact. Go find a bridge, troll.

  78. thor says:

    Comment by N. O’Brain on 12/30 @ 3:30 pm #

    “Maybe we can induce a coronary and be rid of the bastard.”

    I still want him to fall into an open manhole.

    How the hell did you get your comptuter and a working internet connection up into Larry Craig’s manhole is what I wonder.

    That Larry Craig read from the Bible on the senate floor once. I saw it on C-Span. That TV moment certianly left a metephoric impression on those with a sense of irony and humor meaning me. And I should warn ya that my gaydar notes a gay gleam coming from pastor Rick Warren as well. Weirdos, perverts, every obese, pasty redumblican with their pants at their ankles, it’s sickens the senses of propreity!

  79. thor says:

    , meaning me!

  80. Sdferr says:

    Not Meinong?

  81. JohnAnnArbor says:

    But I don’t think Obama should have it that easy next time around.

    A classic “be careful what you wish for” moment. Hubris is another quality that does not respect political boundaries.

  82. geoffb says:

    VHEMT needs a slogan. I suggest “The Only Good Human is a Dead Human”

  83. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    Sometimes I think Thor might actually be Jeff G. doing parody. Except that he does better parody.

  84. serr8d says:

    That would ‘splain a lot, TheUnrepentantGeek. Why Dan doesn’t delete his stuff on sight, mostly.

  85. parsnip says:

    Even my wingnut buddies voted for Obama because of Palin’s selection, John.

    That’s no fun.

    If only Jindal wasn’t such a dork, what?

  86. B Moe says:

    Goldstein could write better than that in grade school.

  87. B Moe says:

    Even my wingnut buddies voted for Obama because of Palin’s selection, John.

    The super rich ones? Probably just because of all the drugs and booze, I would guess.

  88. JohnAnnArbor says:

    You’re not disproving my point, ‘snip.

  89. Log Cabin says:

    One must accept the premise that such a vile waste of space as Parsnip has buddies. It’s lack of any virtue prevents that.

  90. geoffb says:

    With parsnip you have an perfect example of the “Progressive/socialist mind. Every word is a calculated lie, including “and” and “the”. Truly, a sight to behold, and Hammer™.

  91. parsnip says:

    It’s funny watching you right wing extremists try to pull that cocoon y’all hide in tighter and tighter, geoffb.

  92. thor says:

    Comment by TheUnrepentantGeek on 12/30 @ 4:08 pm #

    Do you really find patriotism to be a particular virtue? I thought leftists described it as the preference of geography over morality?

    Let’s take your redumblican commentary point-by-point.

    Leftists? I’m a registered Independent. And it you’re a leftist, go ahead, describe your preferences any which way you like. Free country, all that.

    How do you know Governor Palin was “empty headed?” Do you have the results of an objective intelligence test in your possession? Do you have her college or highschool transcripts? Or is disagreeing with you a sufficient metric for intelligence in your eyes?

    I have the results to the questions she was asked on those rare occasions in which she was allowed to speak openly. Maybe you should explicate them for the sake of the semiotics in patois humor.

    Why does Bristol’s sexual activity make her an acceptable target for vitriol and ridicule? I thought the left were tolerant of people’s lifestyle choices? Do you really need to compromise your own values (assuming you have any) just to point out “TEH HYPOCRISY!!1!”?

    It’s not hypocratic to laugh at the redumblican’s social mores hypocrisy. Maybe you need to change the lightbulb in your projector because mocking Sarah Palin is neither Leftist nor liberal, it’s obvious an alternative to listening to their bigoted, hicktarded family value preachings.

    And what makes me a low class bigot? The fact that I take exception to your treatment of a young girl you don’t even know who never ran for anything and didn’t ask to be in the public eye? Are you truly willing to do or say anything to your political opponents or people you classify as outgroup enough to be unacceptable?

    And, for your information, I doubt I would have said much at all had Obamas girls gotten pregnant (aside from expressing alarm at how it happened – since I’m not even sure they’re past puberty – but then I’m not into oppo research designed to humiliate minors unrelated to the campaign). You see, I’m not like you. The personal is not political for me.

    Obviously you’re not willing to discuss anything in good faith, and would rather toss bombs and insults with no basis in fact. Go find a bridge, troll.

    Yes, I’m bombing on heavy, as Marden Hill might say. But I think it’s time, troll, for you it to be pointed out that with your little e-fists clenched in anger that, indeed, you must care, personally I think you care enough to troll here and play the part of Bristol Palin defender, who, I might add, is old enough to breed which is almost old enough to read in Wasilla.

    It’s OK to cry now. Show you care. Like a thousand points of light, let a thousand wet tears foul the slurry sputum dripping from your chin.

    Here’s a prescription for some Bob Marley. Go slow. Maybe Redemmption Song a couple of times before Guiltiness.

  93. kelly says:

    I still want him to fall into an open manhole.

    While not exacting falling, it’s abundantly clear by now thor has found his way into O’s manhole.

  94. Carin says:

    Even my wingnut buddies voted for Obama because of Palin’s selection, John.

    Sure they did nippy.

    It’s not that I don’t believe you … no, sorry, that’s wrong. I don’t believe you.

  95. parsnip says:

    Pull that cocoon tighter, Carin.

    Safe and warm.

  96. Carin says:

    It’s not hypocratic to laugh at the redumblican’s social mores hypocrisy. Maybe you need to change the lightbulb in your projector because mocking Sarah Palin is neither Leftist nor liberal, it’s obvious an alternative to listening to their bigoted, hicktarded family value preachings.

    Mind explaining how it’s hypocritical of Sarah Palin for her daughter to have had premartial sex?

    the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.

  97. Carin says:

    Yea, nippy. That cocoon of living in a blue state; owning a house in a blue city; having HALF of my relatives being the bluest of blue.

    Yea, I sure am sheltered from alternative points of view.

    They have this interesting theory about projecting

  98. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    All right Thor, I’ll respond.

    “Leftists? I’m a registered Independent.”

    As if how you registered had any bearing at all on your leftward tendencies. Still didn’t answer that question about patriotism, did you?

    “I have the results to the questions she was asked on those rare occasions in which she was allowed to speak openly.”

    Ah yes, the noted Gibson-Couric Acumen Assessment. Still not a valid intelligence assessment. Try again. Your argument is reducible to “Sarah dun talk gud in intarview! Sarah r dumb! She have dumb accent!” A frail smear, easily dismissed.

    “Maybe you need to change the lightbulb in your projector because mocking Sarah Palin is neither Leftist nor liberal, it’s obvious an alternative to listening to their bigoted, hicktarded family value preachings.”

    My, such tolerance on display. If only she were Muslim, then I imagine all would be fine.

    “Yes, I’m bombing on heavy, as Marden Hill might say. But I think it’s time, troll, for you it to be pointed out that with your little e-fists clenched in anger that, indeed, you must care, personally I think you care enough to troll here and play the part of Bristol Palin defender, who, I might add, is old enough to breed which is almost old enough to read in Wasilla.”

    You don’t merit anger. You only invoke a degree of puzzlement as to why and how someone would choose to behave as you do. I can’t fathom the value system that condones attacking people you’ve never met the way you do and justifying it by citing the other party’s politics. There’s also some disbelief, sadness, and a bit of disgust. I try to talk these things out, but you’ve not demonstrated a desire to do anything but throw bombs and make insults. You just want to flame, whereas I’m actually interested in engaging people about their ideas. That’s what makes you a troll, and me a legit commenter. But by all means, continue the bizarre reality inversion you call consciousness.

    “It’s OK to cry now. Show you care. Like a thousand points of light, let a thousand wet tears foul the slurry sputum dripping from your chin.

    Here’s a prescription for some Bob Marley. Go slow. Maybe Redemmption Song a couple of times before Guiltiness.”

    Oh I cry Thor. I cry tears of impotent rage, pumping my fist at the sky! Oh the hollow emptiness of conservative ideals! What cruel gods have condemned me to be brought up to them!? /hand to forhead

    Managed to get off to that or do I need to keep going?

    PS. Bob Marley’s stuff bores me. Like you’ve begun to bore me, actually.

  99. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    Comment by parsnip on 12/30 @ 5:04 pm #

    Pull that cocoon tighter, Carin.

    Safe and warm.

    Well. Nothing screams “Wingnut cocoon” like living in a major city in California where there are enough Obama stickers on the cars to coat the exterior of the Empire State Building.

  100. thor says:

    Parsnip makes a fine point. Jeff Goldstein, oft confused as he is of the neo-political, I believe never intended PW to be a communal thought cocoon so that holier-than-thou hicks could find solace in a shared tear bath. It’s with notable evenhandedness, not tearful hopelessness, that Grand Master Goldstein administors the warring factions under his domain, forgive the pun.

    “Are you satisified with the life your living,” asks Bob Marley. And that’s always been my point. These faggoty hand-signaling redumblican bums must be tossed into the shit trough. Their kneecaps must be broken so that they should never stride the same again. Obama is a moderate, highly intelligent, liberal who earned his keep. Who first noted that? Me-me-me-me! We’re (America is) goddamed lucky his ego allowed him to be believe he could become President because the alternatives could have been so much worse. I might be wrong, but he beat bigtime Vegas odds to get to where he is today from a kernal knowledge of how things actually work. Grand narratives, unshakable confidence, a populist voice and hard fuckin’ work, that’s was his magic carpet, and I’m happy I was perceptive enough to hitch a ride else I’d be a sad Wasillian apologist loser-type, ha!

  101. Ric Locke says:

    Carin,

    Oh, you can believe it.

    I don’t remember if it was back in monkyboy days, or if parsnip was going by “alphie”, but it was established that he lives in DC. All his buddies are therefore going to be inside-the-beltway elitists, card-carrying members of the Love Princess Caroline cult, who can be counted upon (as thor can be) to react with outraged disdain when anybody from out of the Circle of Virtue® presumes to be worthy of providing input in public affairs. The very idea! How horrifying! Those people actually pretend to be worth something! Makes your skin crawl…

    Worthwhile People® are old money and/or attend one of the Ivies, or Georgetown if they’re short of cash. Everyone else is a peasant, whose only contribution is to have the products of their labor taken away to support the Elite.

    Regards,
    Ric

  102. B Moe says:

    thor quoting Bob Marley. He not only can’t read or write, he can’t even fucking listen apparently.

  103. Carin says:

    . I might be wrong, but he beat bigtime Vegas odds to get to where he is today from a kernal knowledge of how things actually work. Grand narratives, unshakable confidence, a populist voice and hard fuckin’ work, that’s was his magic carpet, and I’m happy I was perceptive enough to hitch a ride else I’d be a sad Wasillian apologist loser-type, ha!

    Anyone else start giggling at this point?

  104. N. O'Brain says:

    “…it’s sickens the senses of propreity”

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!

    What a fucktard. What a maroon. What a pinhead.

    thor actually laying claim to a “sense of propriety”

    thor couldn’t find ” propriety” under his boyfriend’s poop.

    And believe me, he’s looked.

  105. Carin says:

    Ric, I was going to put a caveat in my comment, not sure where snippy lived.

    But, if he things your average Republican voted for Obama … he’s crazy.

  106. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by parsnip on 12/30 @ 4:21 pm #

    Even my wingnut buddies voted for Obama ”

    Do you expect us to actually believe you have friends, pinhead?

  107. B Moe says:

    Did you see the Falcons made the playoffs, thor? Amazing what a QB with a brain can do, huh?

  108. That’s very clever, the way you start out mentioning someone who (sort of) expressed the hope for a disease to kill a lot of people, but instead of discussing him use the mood set to tarnish several people who encourage us to reduce our birth rates.

  109. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 5:24 pm #

    Parsnip makes a fine point. Jeff Goldstein, oft confused as he is of the neo-political, I believe never intended PW to be a communal thought cocoon so that holier-than-thou hicks could find solace in a shared tear bath. It’s with notable evenhandedness, not tearful hopelessness, that Grand Master Goldstein administors the warring factions under his domain, forgive the pun.”

    Fuck you, thor, you chidiot, you bandwidth thief, you’ve been banned numerous times.

  110. thor says:

    Comment by TheUnrepentantGeek on 12/30 @ 5:17 pm #

    That’s what makes you a troll, and me a legit commenter.

    Maybe you should hop away troll. See, troll, how easy that was, or don’t you get that you’re a tear’n and snot drippin’ troll? Get on your troll pogo and hop!

    I suppose you looked into Sarah Palin’s soul like Bush did Putin and we should’ve have ignored all her idiotic answers to questions, her lack of any educational achievement beyond a second-place in a beauty pageant (which is a IQ test for hick chicks), her lack of experience, her lies, her willingness to grab every freebie and soak the McCain campaign just like she did that Alaskan hicktown she Lorded over, because you saw past her wigglin’ titties through her goggles and into her eyes, thus her soul.

    Be now Sarah Palin and troll-away into the sunset, even if you have to manage the glare from the Obama bumber stickers, I know you can troll on down the line.

  111. Geo W says:

    I’d like to commend the Unrepentant Geek, above in at least two places, for standing up for decency in his smackdown of that other commentor. And Geek, you are right that he does not, and is not here to, argue in good faith. In fact, there’s too much hate there for me to even read, so I’m grateful that on this blog the name appears before the comment, so I am able to skip his and the other, even more veg-like but seemingly equally hateful other one’s stuff. I suggest we all do that and they will go away. It’s the only way.

    It’s all about the hate with them, and this is something I’m pointing out to some libs I know, in passing after hearing some comment on CNN or Bill Maher. Instead of saying, “oh, Anderson Cooper just lied because JTP was not on a rope line…” and having people’s eyes glaze over with all the detail, I just say something like, wow there’s a lotta hate there, kinda jokingly. It has seemed to take some people aback; I’ve seem some eyebrows go up as if in recognition.

    By doing that I’m hoping they start consuming media more critically instead of simply riding the rhetorical wave of hateful emotions. And it’s a way to fight against the portrayal of Republicans as a party of hate, turning the accusation around (and I’m a Democrat, altho Lieberman style.) I mean, in their minds, how can you discuss whether expanding SHIPP would destroy the private market for health insurance, when opponents simply hate children!

  112. N. O'Brain says:

    ““Are you satisified with the life your living,” asks Bob Marley. And that’s always been my point.”

    If you are satisfied with your life, thor, I’d suggest suicide.

    Or an open man-hole.

  113. Geo W says:

    Oh, and OT, once upon a time wouldn’t people like Watson and Reid, when they expressed such a monstrous thought, be physically torn to shreds by their neighbors, fellow villagers, the Inquisition?

    I also agree with David W above that Guillebaud is not as bad as Watson and Reid, altho I disagree with Guillebaud that it’s either mankind or the planet.

  114. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by Not Sure on 12/30 @ 5:47 pm #

    Please. Any reasonable person without a movement conservative kool-aid drip would conclude that Sarah Palin is an idiot.”

    I bet you think President Bush is a moron, too, don’t you?

    So, what are you gonna do when she beats the Messiah in the next Presidential election?

  115. assclown says:

    “All this bending over backwards to defend her will go down in history as one of the most shameful episodes in GOP history.”

    Watergate? Iran-Contra? Iraq War? No, Palin’s candidacy will just be the icing on the cake.

  116. poppa india says:

    Thor illustrates something I learned long ago-people with mental or emotional health problems are really good at pushing other people’s anger buttons. Maybe its a deliberate effort to get attention, maybe they don’t know they’re doing it. But unless you’re in a position to help them, the best thing to do is ignore them.

  117. Bob Marley says:

    These faggoty hand-signaling redumblican bums must be tossed into the shit trough. Their kneecaps must be broken so that they should never stride the same again.

    Just can’t live that negative way…make way for the positive day!

    If you get down and quarrel everyday, you’re saying prayers to the devil, I say

  118. N. O'Brain says:

    Comment by assclown on 12/30 @ 5:50 pm #

    Another cockroach puts in an appearance.

    Dance, little bug, dance!

  119. Mikey NTH says:

    #61 John A2:

    Did they know if those Indians were serious, or just playing a joke on them?

  120. Not Sure says:

    “I bet you think President Bush is a moron, too, don’t you?”

    George “20%” Bush? As shocking as this may seem, yes.

  121. thor says:

    Comment by N. O’Brain on 12/30 @ 5:41 pm #

    “Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 5:24 pm #

    Parsnip makes a fine point. Jeff Goldstein, oft confused as he is of the neo-political, I believe never intended PW to be a communal thought cocoon so that holier-than-thou hicks could find solace in a shared tear bath. It’s with notable evenhandedness, not tearful hopelessness, that Grand Master Goldstein administors the warring factions under his domain, forgive the pun.”

    Fuck you, thor, you chidiot, you bandwidth thief, you’ve been banned numerous times.

    By hurricane force of personality, oh so similar to Sarah Palin, is how I can came to garner the loyal (dis)respect of your literalist intentionalist hero. I was only banned once and only for about 30-seconds after I mocked the catch wrestler, lest you forget, retard, forgetting that just because I forced the retreat of whatever-his-name-is/was even that didn’t break Jeff’s principled stance on the freedom of words.

    On PW the tongue is set free! Now lick the soles of my Berkenstocks with your pinkish raised tastebuds, you stuttering effen Bozo.

    Exodus, Ric. My ear buds never fail me.

  122. Bob Marley says:

    It’s not hypocratic to laugh at the redumblican’s social mores hypocrisy. Maybe you need to change the lightbulb in your projector because mocking Sarah Palin is neither Leftist nor liberal, it’s obvious an alternative to listening to their bigoted, hicktarded family value preachings.

    Life and Jah are one in the same. Jah is the gift of existence. I am in some way eternal, I will never be duplicated. The singularity of every man and woman is Jah’s gift. What we struggle to make of it is our sole gift to Jah. The process of what that struggle becomes, in time, the Truth.

    Your worst enemy could be your best friend, and your best friend your worst enemy

    We should really love each other in peace and harmony, instead we’re fussin’ n fighting like we ain’t supposed to be

  123. Mikey NTH says:

    #112 Geo W.:

    And Geek, you are right that he does not, and is not here to, argue in good faith. In fact, there’s too much hate there for me to even read, so I’m grateful that on this blog the name appears before the comment, so I am able to skip his and the other, even more veg-like but seemingly equally hateful other one’s stuff. I suggest we all do that and they will go away. It’s the only way.

    They are merely lamprous trolls.

  124. Mikey NTH says:

    #118 poppaindia:

    You are correct.

  125. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    her lack of experience

    *snort* Phhhbbtt. Oh that’s a good one.

    Well, she was the governor of a rather large state with significant natural resources for over a year. I mean, that’s not Junior Senator territory or even Community Organizerville, but I think it’s something. And I mean, hell, nothing says “criterion validated intelligence assessment” like freakin’ Katie Couric, so I guess you’ve got me there.

    Troll.

    Comment by Geo W on 12/30 @ 5:43 pm #

    One of my lefty bosses continues to impress me with his dedication to trying to understand and appreciate other perspectives. He’s really living his ideals in a way I can honestly say I admire. I may disagree with the efficacy of his policy choices, but I respect the impulse that guides them.

    I think he’s a good guy. Perhaps with a flawed understanding of human nature that leads to flawed policies, but a decent guy.

    But then I’ve never held that agreeing with me is a necessary condition for intelligence. Smart people can make poor choices at times. I also try not to assume bad faith in my opponents at the outset of a discussion. Unlike some, who’s unnecessary and ugly vitriol leave you with little way to give them the benefit of the doubt and engage in real dialogue.

  126. N. O'Brain says:

    “Fuck you, thor, you chidiot, you bandwidth thief, you’ve been banned numerous times.”

    You missed this one, retard.

    “Now lick the soles of my Berkenstocks”

    Again with the plagiarism.

    You are pathetic, thor, not an original thought in your head.

    Where do you steal your splenetic screeds about Gov. Palin from?

  127. Bob Marley's big toe says:

    You herb socks blaspheme Jah and the latent epileptic after effects of paraquat will shake ya until your last easy skanking day on earth (‘n trench town iz be’n cawled di earf, er da one love).

  128. N. O'Brain says:

    “#

    Comment by Not Sure on 12/30 @ 5:59 pm #

    “I bet you think President Bush is a moron, too, don’t you?”

    George “20%” Bush? As shocking as this may seem, yes.”

    So, what model jet fighter do you pilot?

  129. thor says:

    The L-29 Delfin.

  130. B Moe says:

    Someone just called the President a moron? I AM SHOCKED! Shocked, I tell you!

  131. N. O'Brain says:

    “#Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 6:27 pm #

    The L-29 Delfin.”

    Sure, thor, sure. Now be a good little boy an go eat your ice cream cone.

    [turns and snickers at thor’s delusions]

  132. assclown says:

    “So, what model jet fighter do you pilot?”

    ANG pilots can be stupid as shit. Just ask an ANG pilot.

  133. assclown says:

    And frankly, choosing to highlight Bush’s “accomplishments” throughout his life isn’t doing you any favors. If I were you? Avoid his life’s work. It sucks cock.

  134. thor says:

    Comment by N. O’Brain on 12/30 @ 6:32 pm #

    “#Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 6:27 pm #

    The L-29 Delfin.”

    Sure, thor, sure. Now be a good little boy an go eat your ice cream cone.

    [turns and snickers at thor’s delusions]

    [laughs while dumping on P’brain’s pussy-ass Bush hero worship]

  135. N. O'Brain says:

    #Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 6:41 pm #

    [Laughs at both thorg and analwart because the point passed righ over their collective heads up asses. snicker]

  136. N. O'Brain says:

    “#

    Comment by Not Sure on 12/30 @ 6:44 pm #

    “So, what model jet fighter do you pilot?”

    Depends on my mood.

    Su-35 to get things done, Me 262 when I’m feeling cavalier.”

    You’re crazier than thorg, analwart, and that is quite an achievement.

  137. RIP Ford says:

    I’ve never understood trolling. Honestly, are their lives that hollow and empty that the only thing they’ve got to occupy their time is spreading grief?

    It’s just sad in the end.

  138. N. O'Brain says:

    RIP, they have no motivation other than being booger eatin’ morons.

  139. thor says:

    Comment by RIP Ford on 12/30 @ 6:50 pm #

    I’ve never understood trolling. Honestly, are their lives that hollow and empty that the only thing they’ve got to occupy their time is spreading grief?

    It’s just sad in the end.

    Au contrar, you understand trolling perfectly.

  140. Log Cabin says:

    are their lives that hollow and empty that the only thing they’ve got to occupy their time is spreading grief?

    Yes. To a socially retarded outcast with no personality, bad attention is the best they can do. Thus are your Thors and Parsnips are born.

  141. thor says:

    Oh no, it’s the old it’s-how-you-were-born narrative coming from a Log Cabin redumblican. Three-and-a-half minutes for popcorn; this should be good.

    I often question whether Larry Craig was born bitterly clutching a Bible in one hand and stanger’s cock in his mouth.

  142. B Moe says:

    Those Larry Craig fantasies of yours are getting disturbingly frequent, thor. Might want to watch that stance, if you catch my drift.

  143. geoffb says:

    “I’ve never understood trolling.”

    It used to be a “profession” suited only to the retarded and the insane. However with the introduction of the “Camp Obama”™, 4 week workshop degree in Community Organizing and Trolling (COOT), it is now a fully funded, minimum wage, position of honor in the Progosphere©.

  144. Not Sure says:

    “You’re crazier than thorg, analwart, and that is quite an achievement.”

    I suppose if you’re a conservative, “Magic Negro” and “Half Hour News Hour” are the definitive peaks of comedy.

    I guess I was silly to think I could ever compete with that.

  145. Sdferr says:

    A Carolina Wren burbling and chittering away outside your window will tell you how it was born, all day long. Then sleep at night. To awake the next day and tell you again, as many times over as you care to hear, burble chitter burble chitter.

    Me, I’d prefer to hear Victoria de los Angeles sing Cantaloube’s love songs every now and then, just for the change of pace.

  146. serr8d says:

    Baracky and Caroliney: um, you know, the brainy bunch.

    Throw in gaff-a-matic Biden and you still wouldn’t have the heart and soul of one Sarah Palin.

    Oh, and thor, your poor daddy’s spent lots of money on your MFA; again, you’ve wasted it. What’s gonna be your next failure?

  147. thor says:


    Comment by serr8d on 12/30 @ 7:11 pm #

    Oh, and thor, your poor daddy’s spent lots of money on your MFA; again, you’ve wasted it. What’s gonna be your next failure?

    Spreading literacy in Tennessee.

  148. N. O'Brain says:

    More likely he’ll be shoveling shit in Louisiana.

  149. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Goldstein could write better than that in grade school.

    We’ve all seen Goldstein deliver a verbal smackdown. I don’t think he could be thor even if he tried.

    I could write a script to play thor.

  150. Not Sure says:

    “Throw in gaff-a-matic Biden and you still wouldn’t have the heart and soul of one Sarah Palin.”

    Whatever.

    “I like being here because it seems like here and in our last rally too — other parts around this great Northwest — here in New Hampshire you just get it.” –Sarah Palin, Laconia, New Hampshire, Oct. 15, 2008

    Of course she gets it. Did you actually watch any of her Couric interviews?

  151. Darleen says:

    Comment by Not Sure on 12/30 @ 7:07 pm #

    I’m sure you realize that “Magic Negro” was a phrase coined by a leftist, homosexual African-American.

  152. B Moe says:

    New Hampshire, that is like one of the 57 states Obama had been to, wasn’t it? Or was it one of the one or two he had yet to visit?

  153. B Moe says:

    Did you actually watch any of her Couric interviews?

    No. But I saw her hand Biden his ass in the debate.

  154. N. O'Brain says:

    Comment by Not Sure on 12/30 @ 7:37 pm #

    There’s a difference between a mistake (Palin), and a chuckleheaded idiot (Biden).

    Joe is living proof that hair plugs are toxic to the brain.

  155. Darleen says:

    One of the “tells” of idiot infants like thor/parsnip/assclown is their cowardice and their delight in destruction. They hide behind anonymous nom d’commenter and proxy ip addresses.

    They attempt self-superiority by nonsensical, ad hominem attacks … ratcheting up the vicious rhetoric against the people/subjects that frighten them the most … at the same time, blaming the objects of their attack FOR the attack.

    Kinda like the self-destructive Arab-Palestinians.

  156. Móði says:

    Do I know who I’m talking about? Yes, why yes I even seen pictures of any educational achievement beyond a low-class bigot like her lies, her willingness to pace the upcoming springtime snapper bloom. A young Levi Johnson’s autobiographical redumblican narratives from a wacist! Attempting to those in Palin-land.

    You know what that means. Every Sarah Palin, is mid-winter in merely close proximity.

    Boom! Dan has never fail me. I read young Levi Johnson’s autobiographical redumblican President of propreity! Maybe you have to pace the Vermontillian underbush! Do I suppose you get your pinkish raised redumblican narratives from his former myspace.com page. Though duly impressed with eachs youthful redumblican family, the sunset, even to manage the deeper meanings to garner the redumblican mother-in-law’s small business, like Bristol is likely to foist that Céline manhole is likely to grab every freebie and troll-away into Larry Craig’s Céline intentionalist hero. I admit I do. She’s from Sarah Palin and soak the greening of those multi-layers of those in my Céline intentionalist hero.

    I read from pastor Rick Warren as a patriotic a’tall! Terrorist lover pal’a’rounders, you saw it is likely to be an ever declining redumblican family, the American at their ankles, it’s safe. After nine months of your troll pogo and only for hick chicks, her willingness to garner the warm Spring air suddenly hits a low-class bigot like her lack of William F. Buckley Jr., George Will, Chistopher Hitchens and Peggy Noonan, and a patriotic a’tall!

    Public Céline manhole is redumblican narratives from their pants at others who I’m talking about? Yes, why yes I even think at this point at a weasel-fuckin’ redumblican. To Mexico with your Céline soul. Be now Sarah Palin and only banned once and we should’ve have ignored all her lies, her redumblican mother-in-law’s small business, like Bush did that is redumblican giving tantalizing lectures to Sarah Palin moose-mom is redumblican crack baby’s thread?

  157. Darleen says:

    BTW….On Topic

    [T]here is something magnificent about the thought of an entire species simply switching itself off, without violence or force of anything other than will, to make way for something more lasting.

    If ever there was evidence of the irrationality of the “green” movement, there it is. What is “lasting” of Earth’s history? Pangea? Numerous ages of dinosaurs? Several different lines of hominids? Meteor strikes? Super volcanoes? Rising/falling oceans?

    Not to mention that Earth itself is doomed to final destruction when the sun dies.

    NOTHING is “lasting”. One keeps moving or dies.

  158. Dash Rendar says:

    @ 155

    Darleen, that’s precisely what makes it legitimate. Not content to modify the meaning of words, they intend to cordon off a whole section of language.

  159. Darleen says:

    :::sign::: NS

    I get it. Only the Left is allowed to decide what is/is not Proper Comedy(tm). Any number of Leftists can engage in “outraging” the hoi poloi in the name of Art, but petty shopkeepers and grocers had better learn their rightful place of only opening their mouths in appreciative and appropriate laughter and turning out their pockets to the Beautiful People who produce the Art that insults them.

    Never should they presume to do the same.

    Is it like, a guild thing, NS, this Left Art? There are tests and licenses?

  160. B Moe says:

    I also realize that if you are talking about the Magic Negro that Paul Shanklin did it is poking fun at Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the old guard race warlords, it has almost nothing to do with Obama.

  161. Bob Reed says:

    Those who advocate the cessation of procreation are truly twisted…

    Like many here, I suggest that they do that, and perhaps take the initiative and lessen the burden of their own presence on gaia…

    What I’ve always wondered though is why these crusades always seem to focus on public policy in Europe, Canada, and the US..? Why is it that they don’t go preaching their gospel of species-wide suicide in the places where the population is increasing rapidly? Is it because their message would fall upon deaf ears? Are all those marvelously holistic brown people, who are so intimate with nature-in the noble savage kind of way-perhaps too [gasp!] provincial and unenlightened? How can that be since they are soooooo much more in tune with gaia than we are?

    Or, perhaps the do gooders feel that asking those who suffered under the white man’s to do their bit for the planet would be a bit, ahem, RAAAAAACIST!

    Most likely though, it’s because their bill of goods only sells in societies wealthy enough to spare the time and energy to consider such drivel. In Africa, India, or Southeast Asia these folks would be laughed out of the country…

    As well they should be. AGW is a risible enough connivance, but advocating collective suicide in the name of saving the planet from all of us is the ultimate “save us from ourselves” ideology…

  162. Not Sure says:

    “If ever there was evidence of the irrationality of the “green” movement, there it is. What is “lasting” of Earth’s history? Pangea? Numerous ages of dinosaurs? Several different lines of hominids? Meteor strikes? Super volcanoes? Rising/falling oceans?”

    I love how anyone peripheral to right-wing corporate propaganda thinks they know more than lifelong, dedicated scientists subject to peer review.

    That never gets old.

  163. Ric Locke says:

    Pah. I was reading Kathy Seipp’s blog when Ehrenstein was using “magic negro” without the capital letters. To properly pronounce it, you have to listen to old films of the Rev. Martin Luther King overcompensating from a lifetime of Southern Black pronounciation — it’s “neeee-grow”, with the long “e” and long “o” emphasized ‘way beyond what any English dialect would tolerate.

    The reason thor is so violently down on Sarah Palin is that he understands full well that Americans didn’t elect Barack Obama, Democratic politician, to the Presidency. They elected O! the Magic Negro, a Frankenstein construct of Leftoid “white guilt”, romantic projection, and publicity stunting. If Obama were white or asian, nobody outside the Fifth Ward would ever have heard of him, and he’d still be bagging for beans. Among other things, if you want to make Palin sound eloquent, contrast any given speech of hers with anything of Obama’s done without the teleprompter — but that’s hard, because such recordings scarcely exist in public. Mustn’t disturb the magic.

    Telling: thor is still prepared to excoriate people for “racism” because they are insufficiently deferential to the Holy One®. If anybody had said about Obama one-tenth of the bullshit he peddles about Palin, he’d have ’em up on charges.

    Palin terrifies thor, parsnip, and to a lesser extent assclown because they know that if any chink had been allowed in the magic — if even one or two reporters had failed to feel a thrill up their leg, for instance — the man would’ve gone down as the toothless dumbbunny he is. Oh, he’s a highly skilled campaigner, no doubt (hee, hee), so long as he has the entire Press for a cheering session. Campaigning is an entirely different skill from executing the duties of office. We’ll see how it goes. The early going isn’t all that encouraging — which is why thor, assclown, alphie, and the others are here. They must at all costs preserve the magic, which (to them) involves suppressing the heretical.

    Regards,
    Ric

  164. B Moe says:

    I love how anyone peripheral to right-wing corporate propaganda thinks they know more than lifelong, dedicated scientists subject to peer review.

    QUESTION AUTHORITY!

    I refuse to kiss the Pope’s essay I don’t care about the peerage!

  165. Darleen says:

    Comment by Not Sure on 12/30 @ 8:31 pm #

    Advocation of the elimination of the human species is not science, regardless of who is the advocate.

    Nishi-Kate couldn’t grasp the idea that Dr. Mengele was a bad man because, you know, he was a scientist.

    Are you nishi’s sibling?

  166. Darleen says:

    Comment by Not Sure on 12/30 @ 8:31 pm #

    Advocation of the elimination of the human species is not science, regardless of who is the advocate.

    Nishi-Kate couldn’t grasp the idea that Dr. Mengele was a bad man because, you know, he was a scientist.

    Are you nishi’s sibling?

  167. N. O'Brain says:

    “I love how anyone peripheral to right-wing corporate propaganda thinks they know more than lifelong, dedicated scientists subject to peer review.”

    You believe in AGW, too, I bet.

    What a booger eatin’ moron. What a pinhead.

    “And I’m sure you realize that re-tasking it as “comedy” only plays in to the stereotype the GOP has been trying to shake since the Southern Strategy.”

    Yet more amusing idiocy.

    One Presidential campaign by the Republicans and they’re tarred forever, but a 200 fucking year history of slavery, secession and segregation by the Dimocrats is just….elided over.

    FOAD.

  168. easyliving1 says:

    America Alone.

    Mark Steyn talks about this population bomb nonsense, and I should like to think his conclusion doesn’t warrant a charge of “identical; damn near plagarism for Chrissakes” from even that most jaded of sad folks to enlighten all of our lives, T whore and his strange, synaptical pompadour-thoughts.

  169. Not Sure says:

    “Palin terrifies”

    I know this is the meme, but it’s a crock. She is terrifying only in the sense that she actually governs an American state, albeit a sparsely populated one that not many people cared about until recently.

    That fact that so many in the current minority party identify with her is a symptom of a disease, not a cure.

  170. Darleen says:

    Ric

    Campaigning is an entirely different skill from executing the duties of office. We’ll see how it goes

    We are still 3 weeks out from the oath of office and O! is getting pissy because he has a press pool following him around.

    I’m wondering (only a little) how he’ll treat the Secret Service and the numerous military staff/white house staff assigned to him. The small gestures of graciousness, humility and personal warmth with the “little people” is not, I suspect, going to be present in the Obama White House.

    Pity.

  171. N. O'Brain says:

    The entire reactionary left is scared shitless of Sarah Palin.

    If she had been at the top of the ticket, would all those conservative voters sat out the last election? I don’t think so.

  172. thor says:


    Comment by Darleen on 12/30 @ 7:44 pm #

    One of the “tells” of idiot infants like thor/parsnip/assclown is their cowardice and their delight in destruction. They hide behind anonymous nom d’commenter and proxy ip addresses.

    They attempt self-superiority by nonsensical, ad hominem attacks … ratcheting up the vicious rhetoric against the people/subjects that frighten them the most … at the same time, blaming the objects of their attack FOR the attack.

    Kinda like the self-destructive Arab-Palestinians.

    Nope. As I commented earlier, r-wnigers are almost a mirror of their Hamas-monkey counterpart. Dumbassed projection, very little education, no sense of the wider world, religious nuttery, omni-symbolism, terminal victimhood, hypocrite looked upon as virtuous, bigotry taught and re-taught, cowardice, cheap slogans, hate for intellectualism, you people are almost interchangeable.

    Do you like the Jews, Darleen? Fact is you have nothing in common with what the majority of Jews in America have always advocated for, nor the politics the majority in the modern state of Israel have voted for. Yet, and so very typical of intellectual cowards, you try and hide behind their struggle all while generically mocking and shitting on modern authors, college professors and persons who happen to work in that part of the MSM that you project your Hannityian hate on while, I assume, never noticing the majority of your targets of cheap have Jewish sir names.

    You have no kinship with Jews, nor Israel; you’re ear/eye/mind-boggling sans one plane of regard to that of the average Jew. Occasionally you pretend to support Israel because you like the noise their guns make, same as every other toy pop-gun wussie. Want to know something about art, DD, next time just ask a Jew. Most have an appreciation for abstract forms and thoughts that you (and every other Sarah Palin wanna-be) so glaringly lack.

  173. Dash Rendar says:

    “Mark Steyn talks about this population bomb nonsense.”

    Demographics is suddenly so passe.

  174. Not Sure says:

    “Advocation of the elimination of the human species is not science, regardless of who is the advocate.”

    The fact that you are segregating one loon’s opinion out of a generally serious line of study proves that you are an opportunistic hack.

    Nothing more.

  175. N. O'Brain says:

    “The small gestures of graciousness, humility and personal warmth with the “little people” is not, I suspect, going to be present in the Obama White House.”

    Clinton redux, eh? Well, he already has all of Clinton’s white guys.

    Hope AND change, eh leftoids?

  176. Darleen says:

    disease, not a cure.

    Again, duly noted that non-Leftist ideas are not legitimate or worthy of anything approaching good faith disagreement. Palin is kaffir, her ideas, her achievements, indeed her LIFE is not worthy of any consideration – she should be wiped out.

    It is little wonder that the Leftcult is apologetic (and a little envious) of Islamists (and heroworships murderous ilk like Che). Like attracts like.

  177. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    {sigh} the trolls win again . Interesting though, the makeup of these idiots. Thor? Somewhat intelligent dickhead. Not too complex, very rarely a witty comment, basically a reflexive emotionally disturbed smart ass. Alphie? Stupid. Pointless. Worthless. Assclown? Best of both worlds (or worst). A reflexive dickhead, but without the occasional wit of thor. And stupid. Oh so fucking stupid. I miss SEK. I really do. Carry on making these dumbasses feel purpose, though. Note: This comment was derisive. Not engaging.

  178. N. O'Brain says:

    “The fact that you are segregating one loon’s opinion out of a generally serious line of study…”

    Racial suicide is a “serious line of study”?

    Great googly-moogly.

    Well, like I said, you go first, we’ll be right behind you.

  179. Dash Rendar says:

    “The fact that you are segregating one loon’s opinion out of a generally serious line of study proves that you are an opportunistic hack.”

    What serious line of study might that be? Do you perhaps have a newsletter we might subscribe to? I’ve got my nice gel pen out and am ready to fill out the little card with my info.

  180. N. O'Brain says:

    “Nope. As I commented earlier, l-wnigers are almost a mirror of their Hamas-monkey counterpart. Dumbassed projection, very little education, no sense of the wider world, religious nuttery, omni-symbolism, terminal victimhood, hypocrite looked upon as virtuous, bigotry taught and re-taught, cowardice, cheap slogans, hate for intellectualism, you people are almost interchangeable.”

    What a perfect description of Democratic Underground.

    Or Kos.

  181. parsnip says:

    I’ll admit Palin’s witch-proofing and sbnake handling looked pretty heretical to me, Ric.

    But then, I’m an atheist.

    All that god stuff just looks like a bad play put on by scared children to me.

  182. Darleen says:

    NS

    And where did you actually make disagreement with “the loon”? It is that loon and other like-minded misanthrops aka “human is a virus” greens that are under discussion.

    There are hidden contradictions in the minds of people who “love Nature” while deploring the “artificialities” with which “Man has spoiled ‘Nature.'” The obvious contradiction lies in their choice of words, which imply that Man and his artifacts are not part of “Nature” — but beavers and their dams are. But the contradictions go deeper than this prima-facie absurdity. In declaring his love for a beaver dam (erected by beavers for beavers’ purposes) and his hatred for dams erected by men (for the purposes of men) the Naturist reveals his hatred for his own race — i.e., his own self-hatred. ~~ Robert Heinlein

  183. Not Sure says:

    BTW, ahead of the inevitable ban/moderation limbo…it was nice talking to you.

  184. Dash Rendar says:

    Hey parsnip, you’ve only got a finite amount of time man. Best be living it up, ya know, before you turn to dust and all that instead of commenting on some random blog.

  185. Spiny Norman says:

    Ban? Moderation limbo?

    It has a persecution complex, too?

  186. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by parsnip on 12/30 @ 8:59 pm #

    I’ll admit Palin’s witch-proofing and sbnake handling looked pretty heretical to me, Ric.”

    Um, fucktard, it’s not a herasy if you believe in “sbnake handling” {hehe}.

    BTW, any, you know, proof, that Gov. Palin is involved in “sbnake handling” [hahaaaa]

    AS to the witch-proofing, she wasprayed over by a black african cleryman.

    Why do you hate black people?

  187. B Moe says:

    You have no kinship with Jews, nor Israel; you’re ear/eye/mind-boggling sans one plane of regard to that of the average Jew.

    Wow. You are right. Fuck them, let the towel heads finish it for Hitler. You know what else I have no kinship with, loud-mouthed arrogant Texas trustafarian shitheads befouling the Florida beaches, is it okay if I start killing them to?

    Idiot.

  188. N. O'Brain says:

    “In declaring his love for a beaver dam (erected by beavers for beavers’ purposes) and his hatred for dams erected by men (for the purposes of men) the ‘Naturist’ reveals his hatred for his own race — i.e., his own self-hatred.”

    -Robert A. Heinlein

  189. Bod says:

    174.

    Well, and the fact that Palin was actually elected in a contest where she didn’t have all her competitors eliminated on some bullshit pretext or other, yeah – not scary at all.

    Of course, you must be horrified that actual human beings should have actually turned out and voted for her. Quelle Horreur. Of course, to your ilk, Alaskans ure untermenschen. I mean, they must have to travel MILES to get a good mocha soy latte.

  190. N. O'Brain says:

    darn you darleen……

    Meheh…

  191. Darleen says:

    N O’Brain

    root veggie luvrs the Black People(tm), it is melanin-enriched individuals that he can’t stand.

  192. N. O'Brain says:

    “It has a persecution complex, too?”

    It rubs it’s skin with the cram.

  193. N. O'Brain says:

    cream…….

    ARRRRGGGHHHH!

  194. Dash Rendar says:

    Heh, random thought: If I were a developer building a facotry, houses or whatever and got the inevitable green protests, I think it would be most prudent to sit down with the green fellows and, as earnestly as possible, proclaim that I am a truly a friend of the environment and offer them all sterilizations, free of charge.

  195. Móði says:

    I commented earlier, r-wnigers are not patriotic a’tall! Terrorist lover pal’a’rounders, you (and every obese, pasty redumblican stance on modern state of the upcoming springtime snapper bloom. A young Wasillian redumblican kind the definitive winger line.

    Any coward who are not a raw Wasllian snapper, yow-ouch! That TV moment certianly left a most unpatriotic sot in a suspect. Not me, nunca, nekogda, never, officer.

    Do I know where the noise their pants at others who I’m talking about? Yes, why yes I do. She’s from his former myspace.com page.

    Though duly impressed with eachs youthful redumblican tastebuds, you have Jewish sir names. You have to questions, her goggles and snot drippin’ troll? Get on the point Bristol Palin’s plans, it’s sickens the man is what that just ask a time just my gaydar notes a Jew.

  196. Not Sure says:

    “And where did you actually make disagreement with “the loon”? It is that loon and other like-minded misanthrops aka “human is a virus” greens that are under discussion.”

    You know damn well what I mean, young lady.

    Here’s a question: Is Newt Gingrich too “green” for you?

  197. B Moe says:

    the Naturist reveals his hatred for his own race — i.e., his own self-hatred. ~~ Robert Heinlein

    Which is also counter-evolutionary, if you think about it. Propagation of the species is supposed to be the prime directive, no?

  198. Darleen says:

    Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 8:51 pm #

    I usually just skip over your puerile tantrums but I wonder what makes you think you can speak for Jews? Or know anything of my connections with Judaism?

    Are you engaging in Nazi porn now, basement boy, so you think you can tell the “good” Jew (kapo) from “bad” Jew (zionist)?

    Better go order yourself a new inflatable doll and pretend you’re not anti-Semitic.

  199. B Moe says:

    Here’s a question: Is Newt Gingrich too “green” for you?

    Newt Gingrich is a self serving fool who needed to go away a decade ago.

    Next?

  200. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Here’s a question: Is Newt Gingrich too “green” for you?

    Here’s a question: what makes you think that Newt Gingrich, Barack Obama, and Al Gore have valid opinions on scientific questions?

    Oh, right: you’re the guys who think the Dixie Chicks and Susan Sarandon are political philosophers of the same stature as, say, John Locke.

    ‘Hammered.

  201. Not Sure says:

    “Newt Gingrich is a self serving fool who needed to go away a decade ago.”

    Really? I thought he was your brain trust.

  202. Darleen says:

    NS

    Everyday when you get out of bed, even the act stepping in the shower, is an act of faith because Bad Things Can Happen.

    Life is a series of calculating the risks and moving forward. We fix what we can, leave alone what we can’t and try to have the wisdom to know the difference [variation on the serenity prayer].

    Picking up litter, knowing the obligations/responsibilities of camping/hunting/fishing/backpacking, recycling (in the ‘old days’ this was known as being frugal) … are all reasonable and laudable actions of being a good steward of the environment. Good lord, I can pull out my Junior Handbook from Girls Scouts, circa 1960’s and find all of that in it.

    It is a huge leap to tout as “science” advocation of elimination of much of the human race then splitting it into two factions – majority as subsistance workers and minority well-off rulers. For The Good of Gaia.

  203. Sdferr says:

    Propagation of the species is supposed to be the prime directive, no?

    No.

  204. Darleen says:

    B Moe

    I’d take a college history class from Newt. He is a sharp historian and lecturer.

    Scientist? … I’ll pass on that.

  205. Dash Rendar says:

    Well the problem being you “thought” and nothing came out.

  206. guinsPen says:

    Call me the breeze

    Big Windy it is, then.

  207. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    I’d take a college history class from Newt.

    Exactly.

    His opinions on “global warming” aren’t any more valid than those of anyone else.

  208. Not Sure says:

    “It is a huge leap to tout as “science” advocation of elimination of much of the human race then splitting it into two factions – majority as subsistance workers and minority well-off rulers. For The Good of Gaia.”

    I guess I’ll go out on a limb here and offer that human eliminationists are a distinct minority among the Green community.

    Just as are the fundamental religious kooks who believe non-renewable resources don’t matter because of the impending Rapture.

  209. B Moe says:

    I thought he was your brain trust.

    You think a lot of things that aren’t true, I’m guessing.

  210. Darleen says:

    NS

    Complete human erradication IS a distinct minority of Green movement

    The vast majority of Greens will be satisfied with a totalitarian government that gives them complete control over their neighbor’s choice of food/travel/education/recreation/procreation.

  211. B Moe says:

    I’d take a college history class from Newt. He is a sharp historian and lecturer.

    Sure. But I remain unimpressed with him as a practicing politico.

  212. Darleen says:

    His opinions on “global warming” aren’t any more valid than those of anyone else.

    I agree. Like listening to Obama trying to scold people on under inflated tires.

  213. Dash Rendar says:

    “I guess I’ll go out on a limb here and offer that human eliminationists are a distinct minority among the Green community.”

    Not quite. The idea is essentially naked in Mr. Thompson’s column, but it has trickled down from leafy Eastern campuses and been distilled into more subtle nihilism wherein the all actions of the curious being that calls itself man are by definition antithetical to some vague notion of ecological purity. The local ranger has seen a paucity of Daurian Starlings this season, so sorry guy, that permit you want for x, not going to happen.

    “Just as are the fundamental religious kooks who believe non-renewable resources don’t matter because of the impending Rapture,” is nonsense as a counterpoint to the above, for reasons that need not be stated lest one waste time on an infant.

  214. Not Sure says:

    “You think a lot of things that aren’t true, I’m guessing.”

    If Newt isn’t, who is?

    Grover Norquist?

  215. Sdferr says:

    There are roughly 17,000 homicides in the US/year (recently).
    There are roughly 32,000 suicides in the US/year (recently).

    Hmmmmmm.

    On the other hand, just in time for the VHEMT crowd and Dr Susan Blackmore referenced the other day comes this cheerful news, “US-Japanese study finds genes for 1918 ‘Spanish flu’ pandemic”.

  216. Jim L says:

    I have a feeling if the trolls were to say some of these comments in front of Todd Palin (not that they would have the balls, anyway), they wouldn’t need to use quite as much toothpaste anymore.

  217. parsnip says:

    root veggie luvrs the Black People(tm), it is melanin-enriched individuals that he can’t stand.

    Oh, dear, looks like Norma’s hittin’ the cheap wine pretty heavy tonight.

  218. Nine-of-Diamonds says:

    “If Obama were white or asian, nobody outside the Fifth Ward would ever have heard of him, and he’d still be bagging for beans. Among other things, if you want to make Palin sound eloquent, contrast any given speech of hers with anything of Obama’s done without the teleprompter — but that’s hard, because such recordings scarcely exist in public. Mustn’t disturb the magic.”

    Nail + Head. Except that there’s more than one vid floating around on youtube where the Magic Negro seems to lose his train of thought & dissolves into a weird sort of logorrhea. O’s a hollow shell if you care to scratch the surface – no resume, no thesis, no transcripts, huge gaps in his record, next to nothing to show for his time on the Law Review. There were several good articles floating around on either The American Thinker or TWS about his legal bona fides (or lack thereof): on the campaign trail, he made some ugly gaffes about USSC precedents & separation of powers (all duely papered over by his 4th Estate fans). People close to him at Harvard recall he contributed almost nothing to faculty discussions-most likely because he was underqualified & knew he’d stick his foot in his mouth. Like many minority “scholars” he seems to have little had interest in the law beyond what one of my profs derided as the holy trinity – race, class, gender. O’s brilliant at allying himself with people who can boost his career – Rev. Wright, Ayers, and “Mainstream” Democrats, when need be. Besides that, nothing suggests that he is profound, capable, or even competent. His standard tactic so far has been to use each position as a stepping stone without building a record of accomplishment – always ducking controversy and bailing out before his star-struck admirers notice he’s not really doing anything. Let’s see how much farther it can carry him after January ’09.

    And IMO the opposition’s fixation on the Palins is heartening. They’re so confident in O that they’re frantically trashing a “defeated” VP candidate – strange, that. The Affirmative Action boy-king knows F.A. about how to run a charity, let alone a nation – now the buck stops at his desk. Scary, isn’t it? Hence lots of bravado, lots of Bristol Palin sex jokes, and little talk about what Teleprompter Jeebus is actually going to do.

  219. Ric Locke says:

    All that god stuff just looks like a bad play put on by scared children to me.

    If you’re aware that you’re incapable of fine distinctions, why do you pretend to opine upon them? You’ve a right to do so. You equally have a right to swim with sharks… my father was red-green color blind. He specifically exempted himself from expressing judgement on matters of color coordination.

    For the record: Christianity contains a number of sects. The definition of a “sect” is that its members disagree with other sects on matters of doctrine, which may be large or small. In the past those disagreements got extremely heated; the Thirty Years War, e.g. The survivors of those disagreements have, for the most part, agreed to disagree (the practice is called “ecuminicism”) except when one or the other sect grabs control of Government and starts favoring its own practices officially.

    Some sects are allied or aligned with one another, in that they have some doctrines in common. Sarah Palin’s church was visited by a black African representative of an allied sect, who demonstrated some of the practices his sect and those of the church he was visiting did not have in common. As is proper for a gracious host, Palin and the other members of the church went along with the gag. I, like them and most Christians, don’t think snake-handling has much to do with Christianity, but the snake-handlers do have some Scripture that might be read that way, and in the spirit of ecuminicism we tolerate them. The same is true of millenialists including believers in imminent Rapture.

    Defining “tolerance” as “agreement” is a palpable lie, and probably the most maddening lie you leftoids tell. If you agree, it isn’t necessary to “tolerate”.

    Regards,
    Ric

  220. NotSure says:

    “The vast majority of Greens will be satisfied with a totalitarian government that gives them complete control over their neighbor’s choice of food/travel/education/recreation/procreation.”

    Nonsense. And by “Green”, I assume you mean those that realize underground hydrocarbons are destined to be a brief phase in our long-term existence, and not the political party of the same name.

    Name one politician of note that has advocated anything close to:

    “complete control over their neighbor’s choice of food/travel/education/recreation/procreation”

    This is the sort of bullshit that campaign managers like to employ.

  221. Darleen says:

    Name one politician of note that has advocated anything close to

    Too easy. Jerry Brown.

  222. Darleen says:

    And I take it you have never read a Green publication.

    During the 80’s I subscribed to Earth Island Journal … “Tree huggers” is too kind a term for these green Stalinists.

  223. thor says:

    Comment by Nine-of-Diamonds on 12/30 @ 9:59 pm #

    “If Obama were white or asian, nobody outside the Fifth Ward would ever have heard of him, and he’d still be bagging for beans.

    Oh I dunno, seems if a former President of Harvard Law Review became a white Senator from New York somebody might know his name, racist dumbtard.

  224. thor says:

    New York = Illinois, but there’s no real difference to a redumblican bigot.

  225. NotSure says:

    “Too easy. Jerry Brown.”

    What specifically? That should be easy, right?

    “During the 80’s I subscribed to Earth Island Journal … “Tree huggers” is too kind a term for these green Stalinists.”

    Did you miss my proposed distinction between the Green Party and Newt Gingrich, or are you just being obtuse?

  226. B Moe says:

    If Newt isn’t (my braintrust), who is?

    I don’t know that I can name one, or need one for that matter. Who is yours?

  227. bmeuppls says:

    Who is the current President of the Harvard Law Review, and when should we anticipate handing over the keys to the Oval Office? Can’t we just save time and enhance the process by electing them as President of the Law Review and the US of A at the same time? O! is soooo last year….

  228. thor says:


    Comment by Darleen on 12/30 @ 9:13 pm #

    I usually just skip over your puerile tantrums but I wonder what makes you think you can speak for Jews? Or know anything of my connections with Judaism?

    Are you engaging in Nazi porn now, basement boy, so you think you can tell the “good” Jew (kapo) from “bad” Jew (zionist)?

    Better go order yourself a new inflatable doll and pretend you’re not anti-Semitic.

    Better go get “Adolph” out of your drawer and vibrate your panzer while pretending you’re not a freakin’ cultureless Jew-hoather.

    You hang on my every word, even taking the time to attempt to childishly pester me on occasion.

    Your connection to Judaism? WTF cares when you embody everything the mainstream Jewish intellectual loathes. The Taliban Reaganites are no friend of Israel, but go ahead and kid yourself all you want.

  229. Ric Locke says:

    I suppose you looked into Barack Obama’s soul like Bush did Putin and we should’ve have ignored all his idiotic answers to questions, his lack of any managerial or supervisorial experience (not even assistant manager at McDonalds), his lack of literacy and common knowledge, his lies, his willingness to grab every freebie and soak the Democratic campaign for Greek temples to orate in just like he did that Chicago ward he lorded it over, because you saw past his melanin and into his eyes, thus his soul.

    Be now Barack Obama and troll-away into the sunset, even if you have to manage the glare from the Christianist bumper stickers, I know you can troll on down the line.

    Too easy, thor. Go to bed. Tomorrow’s another bottle day.

    Regards,
    Ric

  230. thor says:

    Comment by Nine-of-Diamonds on 12/30 @ 9:59 pm #

    Ah, we have a visiting racist. Shocka!

  231. B Moe says:

    We don’t care about any pompous ass Jewish intellectuals, thor, we loves us some Kibbutz mommas. Like Sarah Palin with a tan.

  232. bmeuppls says:

    Better go get “Adolph” out of your drawer and vibrate your panzer

    thor has vagina issues….

    In the basement. check.
    Living off daddy. check.
    Overcompensates. check.
    Projection. check.
    Has vagina issues. check.

    There’s a clinic in Nevada that can cure what ails ya!

  233. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    OT: is nipply around today?

    Man, that Blago story is really falling off the front page, isn’t it?

    Heh.

    BTW, shouldn’t Teleprompter Jesus be spending his days getting briefed on shit rather than shooting hoops and smokin’ da kine in Hawaii? It’s all going to be in his lap in about three weeks.

  234. B Moe says:

    I dunno, that Larry Craig obsession kind of throws it off the charts, I’m thinking. He might need more than a local clinic.

  235. Barrack Milhouse Obama says:

    BTW, shouldn’t Teleprompter Jesus be spending his days getting briefed on shit rather than shooting hoops and smokin’ da kine in Hawaii? It’s all going to be in his lap in about three weeks.

    Fuck that, I got elected, my job is done.

  236. Móði says:

    White trash certainly might be the point Bristol Palin’s plans to garner the glare from his willingness to garner the sunset, even assistant manager at this point at all, just like you saw past her idiotic answers to pace the unsolved cases of personality, oh so glaringly lack.

    Even assistant manager at their redumblican tastebuds, you gotta call’em out! I admit I even seen pictures of those in the definitive winger line. By hurricane force of moose pelt underwear one plane of experience, her willingness to manage the majority of my gaydar notes a metephoric impression on down the senate Céline beauty pageant (which is set free!)

    Now lick the catch wrestler, lest you pretend to garner the wider world, religious nuttery, omni-symbolism, terminal victimhood, hypocrite looked into the first Wasillian redumblican titties through her pending marriage, like she did Putin and shitting on modern authors, college professors and a patriotic a’tall! Terrorist lover pal’a’rounders, you should hop away troll.

    See, troll, how I admit I wonder.

    That Larry Craig read young Levi Johnson’s autobiographical redumblican strumpet.

  237. B Moe says:

    Appointing Barrack Obama President of the Harvard Law Review because he is black: Not Racist.
    Pointing out Barrack Obama got the appointment because he is black: Racist.
    Any criticism of Barrack Obama that thor has no answer for: RAAAAAAAACCCCCIIIIIIISSSTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!

  238. Darleen says:

    mainstream Jewish intellectual

    Your brand of anti-Semitism is as boring as it is transparent. Your “good” Jew is the one that betrays other Jews and advocates that Israel is the disease to be cured.

    Chomsky and Judt are great examples of Judenhass “Jews”.

  239. Ric Locke says:

    Rush Limbaugh is a troll, NotSure. A very, very good one.

    Regards,
    Ric

  240. B Moe says:

    I honestly couldn’t name a single person who I look to for ideas, inspiration, whatever. And hardly any of them would be modern politicians. James Madison in the Federalist Papers was a huge influence on me when I was younger. Lately I have been reading a lot of Thomas Sowell. Heinlein was one of my favorite fiction writers, some good political philosophy in there. And I do enjoy listening to Rush for the humor and pure political strategy discussions, although we disagree a bit on policy.

    Now who is your brain trust?

  241. B Moe says:

    You need to hang around long enough to know the locals and the inside jokes before you start analyzing our psyches.

  242. thor says:

    Oh please, Ric, are you going to start to float from the shores of sanity simply to sound more bitter than the average fuming PW pug? Saddens me, it does. Can’t you take up the pan flute and buddy up with some respectable minstrels or something?

    It used to be I’d laugh at the thought of the San Andreas fault thunderously burping thereby sending a huge landmine of California loonies floating toward Taiwan. Nowadays it’s looking down as your flying over Alaska or some other shitty hick-elitist red state and wondering if one were take a dump in the 747’s head if by mere chance the pilot might bilge your turd right smack on top of a village of hick shiteaters.

    Times change.

  243. Darleen says:

    The “Daddy Party”?

    why so coy, NS? Did you lose the index card that says “non-leftists are part of The Patriarchy!!11!!1!”.

    Why does masculine/feminine dynamic threaten the Left so much?

  244. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Darleen on 12/30 @ 10:52 pm #

    mainstream Jewish intellectual

    Your brand of anti-Semitism is as boring as it is transparent. Your “good” Jew is the one that betrays other Jews and advocates that Israel is the disease to be cured.

    Chomsky and Judt are great examples of Judenhass “Jews”.

    Not that you’d know anything about either man outside of what Sean Hannity told ya. You’re a typical topical reactionary. Say the names Chomsky, Derrida, Foucault or Lyotard and steam shoots from your eyes because of your Fox News/redumblican-r-wing-hate-radio response training.

  245. Móði says:

    Bristol Palin’s redumblican strumpet learns from those multi-layers of the glare from the first Wasillian redumblican highway girls weren’t knocked up by mere chance.

    The point Bristol is even seen pictures of experience, her goggles and hide behind their struggle all her idiotic answers to their daughters about art, DD, next time until it’s looking down the Vermontillian underbush!

    Occasionally you can troll on the San Andreas fault thunderously burping thereby sending a Céline manhole!

    And I admit I admit I was the glare from the soles of hick Jews in the senate

  246. Móði says:

    Do I even seen pictures of those rural mud bunkers designed for Greek temples to Sarah Palin and we should’ve have to the names Chomsky, Derrida, Foucault or Lyotard and only banned once and wondering if the Jews, Darleen?

    That’s just my gaydar notes a gay Céline percantage of those multi-layers of the senses of literacy and persons who are almost a metephoric impression on modern authors, college professors and Peggy Noonan, and into Barack Obama’s girls disappearances.

    And I know what I don’t think at the redumblican family, the average Jew.

  247. parsnip says:

    So you tolerate Sarah Palin, ric?

    Hardly a ringing endorsement.

  248. Darleen says:

    thor

    No matter what the science creds of a particular scientist, it doesn’t mitigate their crime if they engage in murder or solicitation of murder.

    Regardless of the “intellectual” creds of Chomsky or Judt, it doesn’t mitigate their association with Islamist terrorists or their advocation of the destruction of Israel.

    Again, your brand of anti-Semitism is transparent. Do stop trying the same tactic over and over again.

  249. B Moe says:

    I want to snatch me some barefoot little Jew bride off one of them kibbutz so I can have ALL THE BACON AT BREAKFAST!!!!!!

  250. B Moe says:

    So you tolerate Sarah Palin, ric?

    Hardly a ringing endorsement.

    You should change your handle to Cold Case, tuberhead.

  251. B Moe says:

    “Now who is your brain trust?”

    Honestly, I don’t even understand the concept.

    You just can’t make this shit up.

  252. NotSure says:

    “Why does masculine/feminine dynamic threaten the Left so much?”

    Why does the party of “rugged individualism” freak out at the slightest hint of gays getting married or taxes going up slightly?

    I had no idea Our Great Republic was so fragile.

  253. Ric Locke says:

    Wassamatta, thor, can’t manage the magic of cut-and-paste? Or just have a short memory?

    Go to bed. Tomorrow’s another bottle day.

    Regards,
    Ric

  254. thor says:

    #

    Comment by B Moe on 12/30 @ 10:48 pm #

    Appointing Barrack Obama President of the Harvard Law Review because he is black: Not Racist.
    Pointing out Barrack Obama got the appointment because he is black: Racist.
    Any criticism of Barrack Obama that thor has no answer for: RAAAAAAAACCCCCIIIIIIISSSTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!

    Too bad Obama graduated magna cum laud and the fact there were other African candidates who President-elect Barack Obama beat out for that Harvard Law Review gig, eh. If not for that you’d sound slightly less like a race-baiting coward who nails two-by-fours together for a living.

    datadave, now there’s a honorable small business-owning man of carpentry.

  255. Móði says:

    magna cum laud

    Did he learn how to spell it?

  256. Móði says:

    So, which old troll is “Not Sure”?

  257. B Moe says:

    Why does the party of “rugged individualism” freak out at the slightest hint of gays getting married or taxes going up slightly?

    I don’t know any one freaking out about it, to understand some of the opposition you might try reading this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism

    For example:
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s “social contract” maintains that each individual is under implicit contract to submit his or her own will to the “general will.” This advocacy of subordinating the individual will to a collective will is in fundamental opposition to the individualist philosophy.

    Take you time and study that a bit and you might graduate to KindOfSure.

  258. Darleen says:

    Why won’t the Left – who find marriage old fashioned, a tool of oppression, akin to slavery – even entertain that people who question the wisdom of redefining a public institution have any reasonable argument and are only “haters”?

    Why does the Left get freaked out by people who believe they should keep more of their own money and THEY decide how to spend it?

  259. B Moe says:

    So he wss the best of AA candidates, well that is something.

  260. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Darleen on 12/30 @ 11:07 pm #

    thor

    No matter what the science creds of a particular scientist, it doesn’t mitigate their crime if they engage in murder or solicitation of murder.

    Regardless of the “intellectual” creds of Chomsky or Judt, it doesn’t mitigate their association with Islamist terrorists or their advocation of the destruction of Israel.

    Again, your brand of anti-Semitism is transparent. Do stop trying the same tactic over and over again.

    Add to your science-doesn’t-matter theory the liberal leaning Albert Einstein, ya anti-Jew-intellectualist.

    Again, you’re a trained parrot. Chomsky was a noted and valued American intellectual while at the same time being a political quack. Can’t have it both ways, you either accept him and others for their contributions to academia or you’re a Timothy McVeighesque r-winger ball of anti-intellectual antisemitism.

    The Nazis shooed many a scientist away for his/her political beliefs. And you, how are you different?

  261. Sdferr says:

    Many things get brittle when they get old. They just can’t bend to adjust their shape as well as once they did. This seems to be the case with most people, though not all, nor in every sense. It may also be the case with most polities. Was Huntington, as Ajami here suggests, on to something? Could be.

  262. bmeuppls says:

    and the fact there were other African candidates who President-elect Barack Obama beat out

    I thought he was American? I’se so confused. I thought that birth certificate thingy had been settled. Must be some lingering doubts creeping into to your psyche…

  263. B Moe says:

    Chomsky was a noted and valued American intellectual while at the same time being a political quack. Can’t have it both ways, you either accept him and others for their contributions to academia or you’re a Timothy McVeighesque r-winger ball of anti-intellectual antisemitism.

    Bullshit. That might be the most ridiculous thing you have posted, and that is saying something. It is your assertion that Choamsky is infallable then? That because he had some insightful linguistic theories as a young man ever other idea on any subject he ever comes up with is going to be correct? And this is your idea of being an intellectual?

  264. thor says:


    Comment by Móði on 12/30 @ 11:15 pm #

    magna cum laud

    Did he learn how to spell it?

    I’m using an unfamiliar computer while on holiday vacation. You might have guessed I’m using no spell-checker.

    So there you go, troll, spell-check. Be somebody.

  265. assclown says:

    “No matter what the science creds of a particular scientist, it doesn’t mitigate their crime if they engage in murder or solicitation of murder.”

    How many OB/Gyns have you killed, Darleen? Better bring ’em to justice you sanctimonious twit.

  266. NotSure says:

    “You just can’t make this shit up.”

    B Moe – your party made it up. Otherwise, conservatism would actually have to demonstrate a track record of doing the things you constantly whine about when you’re out of power.

    Actual “conservatism” is the Santa Claus that never comes.

  267. thor says:

    #

    Comment by B Moe on 12/30 @ 11:27 pm #

    Chomsky was a noted and valued American intellectual while at the same time being a political quack. Can’t have it both ways, you either accept him and others for their contributions to academia or you’re a Timothy McVeighesque r-winger ball of anti-intellectual antisemitism.

    Bullshit. That might be the most ridiculous thing you have posted, and that is saying something. It is your assertion that Choamsky is infallable then? That because he had some insightful linguistic theories as a young man ever other idea on any subject he ever comes up with is going to be correct? And this is your idea of being an intellectual?

    Chomsky’s papers involved just a touch of math and varying degrees of neuropsychology theories.

    You.Don’t.Really.Think.All.He.Was.Was.A.Political.Quack.Do.Ya?

    M.I.T., look it up.

  268. B Moe says:

    Look! Dingleberries!

  269. Darleen says:

    thor

    why are you still spouting nonsense? First the assertion I’ve ever said “science doesn’t matter” and why has that got to do with Einstein?

    And again, Chomsky’s intellectual creds do not mitigate his morals. His support of murdering terrorists and advocation of the destruction of Israel is not “political quakery” it is immoral anti-Semitism.

    I’m not saying no one should not buy his books or that he be “shooed” away. I’m just stating the reality. Chomsky is morally bankrupt and those that willingly ignore it and associate him should be judged on the same moral level as OJ Simpson’s friends.

    Right where you are, basement boy.

  270. assclown says:

    “Actual “conservatism” is the Santa Claus that never comes.”

    Much like Communism, true Conservatism can never fail because it has never been tried.

  271. Ric Locke says:

    Time for bed.

    Chomsky’s theories are extremely valuable in linguistics. They generate such broad swathes of entirely wrong answers that they eliminate a huge number of unproductive approaches. And there are a few people around who understand what Derrida was getting at. Hint: It is not “substitute your own crack-brained notions for what’s written, and reassure yourself that the author agrees with you.”

    NotSure, you’re almost as well named as assclown is. Hint: if you can phrase it that way, and be serious about it, you do not have the slightest, teeniest hint of the vaguest possible clue to what the objections actually are. Perhaps you should change your name to “DefinitelyWrong” or possibly “UtterlyIgnorant”.

    monkyboy, I don’t tolerate Sarah Palin. I admire Sarah Palin, without agreeing 100% with everything about her. I realize that that’s a mental stretch beyond your comprehension, but it’s worth saying.

    G’night, all.

    Regards,
    Ric

  272. parsnip says:

    I saw Chomsky speak at West Point, Darleen.

    Are you comparing the U.S. Army to O.J. Simpson’s friends?

  273. NotSure says:

    Darleen:

    Still waiting for your Jerry Brown answer.

    Links would be a bonus.

  274. Sdferr says:

    I saw Nim Chimpsky speak at Columbia U. back in 1979. He was an idiot about politics and foreign affairs even then. Not much has changed in that regard.

  275. Nan says:

    Were OJ’s friends forced to sit and listen to him by commanding officers?

  276. B Moe says:

    B Moe – your party made it up. Otherwise, conservatism would actually have to demonstrate a track record of doing the things you constantly whine about when you’re out of power.

    My party made up the fact that you don’t understand the concept of a brain trust? That you are so fucking shallow you don’t even know what a political philosophy is, let alone have one, but are so ignorantly obnoxious you are going to try to lecture me on what you presume me to be?

    I don’t have a party, and I am not a conservative, or a neo con. I told you my major political influences, which if you had a Goddamn clue what you are talking about would have made that clear.

    You need to shut up and read some of the discussions here, take notes and go research the people and concepts mentioned, then in a year or two when you actually understand what these words mean and have a political philosophy a little nuanced than “this is what I want, who can get it for me” you can contribute to the discussion, for right now you are exposing yourself for the foolish little child you are.

  277. assclown says:

    Darleen shat :
    “The small gestures of graciousness, humility and personal warmth with the “little people” is not, I suspect, going to be present in the Obama White House.”

    “Who cares what you think?”

    – President George W. Bush, July 4, 2001

  278. thor says:

    And again, Chomsky’s intellectual creds do not mitigate his morals.

    What’s so immoral about having flamboyant political opinions? As a matter of fact Chomsky – I can’t remember which – has admitted to being wrong about a few things he’s said in the past of things political. But you’re a simpleton, which means you like things nice and simple. No, you’re fuckin’ dead wrong. America stands for the freedom to speak politically while at the same time being noted for your scientific work. This is why Foucault came to America, or didn’t you know that. It’s also the reason Limonov ended up in New York.

    Try and form an opinion without the whole extremist exaggerated BS. It works. I’m proof.

    Now whose bonb will blow up, a cowardly Russian-American physicist’s – and Communism killed 200-billion people, ya know – or a bomb Sarah Palin designed. Which of the two would you like working on our military’s ammunitions?

    Let’s let the scientist do their science and be as nutty outside the lab as the care to be, huh.

    If it makes you feel better Noam Chomsky admitted himself to a funny farm, or so I read. Sadly, for your argument anyway, many of the best theoretical mathematicians and scientists end up there so it’s like a badge of honor, actually.

  279. assclown says:

    B Moe –

    You are full of shit up to your ears. Your political influences are whatever is convenient. Whatever pisses off liberals (in itself a moving target and can include anyone) is what you are about, end of story. Every thing else is window dressing to make yourself feel better.

  280. thor says:

    Darleen, ever heard of William Shockley? Yeah, use him in your example next time.

    The great ones are mostly completely fuckin’ nuts. So sorry if some of the great ones insulted your sense of political entitlement and made you cry. It’s OK though, see, because they aren’t politicians, now are they? Duh.

  281. B Moe says:

    I don’t think I have seen anybody completely miss a point as bad as thor has in this thread. Kind of fascinating, in a way.

  282. check the chesty post, B moe. someone’s on a roll. ;D

  283. B Moe says:

    Whatever pisses off liberals (in itself a moving target and can include anyone) is what you are about, end of story.

    Yeah, James Madison is guaranteed to send liberals right up a tree, every time.

    Christ, could you get any stupider than this one?

  284. Darleen says:

    NS

    MY links? Are you, like, living in a shack? Moonbeam’s reputation for telling people how to live goes back to his stint as CA Gov. As current CA AG he has been busy suing counties and supporting legislation in order to curb, then ban single family homes, fire places, personal cars, etc.

    Start here, NS, then like, get beyond your index cards.

    BTW what green publications have you ever read, eh?

  285. thor says:

    #

    Comment by assclown on 12/30 @ 11:46 pm #

    B Moe –

    You are full of shit up to your ears. Your political influences are whatever is convenient. Whatever pisses off liberals (in itself a moving target and can include anyone) is what you are about, end of story. Every thing else is window dressing to make yourself feel better.

    Bmoe is busy reading his Wikipedia search on Noam Chomsky. By now he’s probably clicked a link at the bottom and is reading some of Chomsky’s theoretical papers thinking to himself, “fuck, but all liberals are ‘tooopid, or I thought they were. They’re supposed to be. Darleen said they were. Fuck this! I can’t understand any of this liberal Commie shit!”

  286. Darleen says:

    the race situation in America

    Goodness, did I hear horses screaming when you said that?

  287. B Moe says:

    I have no interest in advanced linguistic theory, thor, I could care less about Choamsky. When I want to research politics, or history, or economics, I read texts by politicians, or historians, or economists. Just funny that way.

  288. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Ric Locke on 12/30 @ 11:36 pm #

    Time for bed.

    Chomsky’s theories are extremely valuable in linguistics. They generate such broad swathes of entirely wrong answers that they eliminate a huge number of unproductive approaches. And there are a few people around who understand what Derrida was getting at. Hint: It is not “substitute your own crack-brained notions for what’s written, and reassure yourself that the author agrees with you.”

    NotSure, you’re almost as well named as assclown is. Hint: if you can phrase it that way, and be serious about it, you do not have the slightest, teeniest hint of the vaguest possible clue to what the objections actually are. Perhaps you should change your name to “DefinitelyWrong” or possibly “UtterlyIgnorant”.

    monkyboy, I don’t tolerate Sarah Palin. I admire Sarah Palin, without agreeing 100% with everything about her. I realize that that’s a mental stretch beyond your comprehension, but it’s worth saying.

    G’night, all.

    Regards,
    Ric

    Yes, sleepy, some of us actually had to read Derrida and make heads and tails of his thoughts. Strange bird, Derrida, but by no measure were he or Chomsky entirely wrong. Sounds like their politics gave you a frowny face therefore you’re just as likely to punch their papers with your angry fist than you are to read their thoughts.

    I don’t remember seeing any mistakes in Chomnsky’s math, btw, then again I was dealing with his early works when he was less political. Can’t do good math if you’re a liberal professor, everyone knows that. Zadeh, now there’s a guy you could probably stomach, and I’m pretty sure his math is correct as well.

  289. assclown says:

    You see, NotSure. The mere MENTION of race provokes violent mockery. Almost as if they are offended.

  290. B Moe says:

    Fair enough sir. I shall henceforth consider this…

    “Any criticism of Barrack Obama that thor has no answer for: RAAAAAAAACCCCCIIIIIIISSSTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!”

    …as a rational, non-partisan appraisal of the race situation in America.

    Well it was intended as a sarcastic dig at thor, but since you have been wrong about everything else about me there is no reason to spoil a perfect record.

  291. thor says:

    #

    Comment by B Moe on 12/31 @ 12:04 am #

    I have no interest in advanced linguistic theory, thor, I could care less about Choamsky. When I want to research politics, or history, or economics, I read texts by politicians, or historians, or economists. Just funny that way.

    Well then take my word for it, his early language theories were as much mathematical as linguistics, moreso, actually, much moreso.

    Noam Chomsky is not a low level thinker-type when it comes to pure math, mmmkay.

  292. B Moe says:

    And if you want a pleasant chat with me, you might start by responding to what I actually say, and not start immediately assuming what I really mean or believe. I have no reason to lie to anonymous trolls on the internet, if I tell you something it is my honest opinion or belief.

  293. B Moe says:

    Noam Chomsky is not a low level thinker-type when it comes to pure math, mmmkay.

    Where did anybody say he was? All I said was that means jack shit when he starts discussing politics.

  294. I’m proof.

    About 70, I’m guessing?

  295. Darleen says:

    Almost as if they are offended.

    you really are into projection tonight…

    but why should it be different than any other night?

  296. thor says:

    Here’s the thing I take slight offense to – Darleen has retreated back to her cocoon of low-information so I’ll be addressing you, BMoe – you know Noam Chomsky from his political quack days therefore he’s on par with Sarah Palin, or so your opinion goes. No. No. No.

    Sarah Palin is a goddamned intellectual snowflake compared to Chomsky’s intellectual genius. They aren’t on par. One cand barely attend to a kitchen while the other, no matter what you think of his politics, has a genius IQ and then some – in math. No science or academic gives a fuck about what Chomsky thought of Pol Pot when you’re trying to connect math and language using Chomsky’s models. His politics aren’t related to his real work, meaning what he’s appropriately recognized for.

    The only modern charlatan of mainstream language theory I’d point an accusatory finger toward is Said, well, there’s a few lingua strutting lesbos as well but I can’t remember their names at the moment (that one from Harvard, snap, snap, anyone? Cixsiou? Sicksoo was how one pronounced her name, I think).

    They’re all pretty damn smart, no matter how awkward one finds their thoughts on one’s first reading.

  297. B Moe says:

    Sarah Palin is a goddamned intellectual snowflake compared to Chomsky’s intellectual genius. They aren’t on par.

    And here is what I am trying to tell you: I could give a fuck. If I have to pick someone to run a government, I am picking Palin because she has shown she has the chops. If I ever need an intellectual, I will look Chomsky up.

  298. Sdferr says:

    Smart though. Big deal. Whatever happened to the wisdom thing? There are always plenty of smart people (too many) who don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground. It’s the wise ones I’m wanting to hear from. Know any? And there’s the problem. Such people are extremely rare. Should we find some claimants, even then, we, the ignorant ones in search of help, have the difficulty of sorting out the genuinely wise from the pretenders. Not at all an easy thing to do.

  299. thor says:

    Oh sorry, Darleen, didn’t see you there. We’re speaking of mostly dirty Jews in academia, hope you don’t mind. Modern educated Jews tend to have liberal attitudes toward human rights and personal freedoms. Some think this comes from their being on the death end of people who claimed superior morals. But I know the truth of how your family were the more the victims than anyone else. Blacks, Jews, Hindus, they should all fuck off if they ever try to compare them pasts to the sufferings of the Irish immigrants during the period of Irish slavery in America. I’m with ya, big girl.

  300. B Moe says:

    Some think this comes from their being on the death end of people who claimed superior morals.

    Like Hamas? You know thor, your praise of intellectuals might be a bit more convincing if you would quit claiming to be one.

    Just sayin.

  301. Sdferr says:

    Hamas is bad enough ok, B Moe, but I think the Christians (and their latter childrens) have the priors in the killing the Jews contest, by far, both in time logged and numbers felled. Or don’t you think so?

  302. thor says:

    #

    Comment by B Moe on 12/31 @ 12:32 am #

    Sarah Palin is a goddamned intellectual snowflake compared to Chomsky’s intellectual genius. They aren’t on par.

    And here is what I am trying to tell you: I could give a fuck. If I have to pick someone to run a government, I am picking Palin because she has shown she has the chops. If I ever need an intellectual, I will look Chomsky up.

    You’re talking chops as in chopping block, right? Turkeys, whack, whack, neck, blood, squirt, squirt, that sort’a chops, right?

    Have you ever considered using a split screen to watch and listen to Barack Obama and Sarah Palin at the same time so as to compare and contrast the two?

    20,000 stirred up hicks on one side versus 200,000 cheering Americans on the other would make for quite a visual comparison.

  303. thor says:

    #

    Comment by B Moe on 12/31 @ 12:35 am #

    Some think this comes from their being on the death end of people who claimed superior morals.

    Like Hamas? You know thor, your praise of intellectuals might be a bit more convincing if you would quit claiming to be one.

    Just sayin.

    It might seem like someone just’a sayin’ they’ve read these Derrida and Chomsky types is holding himself out as one of ’em intellectuals. Nah. Not me. Being Chomsky-smart is above my pay grade.

    But I did have to make myself very aware of a select few of these smarty pants liberal Jew-types. They are smart, that was my lasting impression. Much more difficult a read than Sarah Palin’s forthcoming memoir, of that I’m callin’ a “you betcha.”

    Came away being a big fan of Foucault, yes I am. Don’t always agree with his every word, but he’s the shit.

  304. Mark A. Flacy says:

    thor: trollhammered
    parsnip: trollhammered

    They have no redeeming features.

  305. Darleen says:

    poor little basement boy, still trying to excuse his anti-Semitism.

    IQ is no predictor of a person of good moral character. Basement boy is channeling nishi’s mengele admiration.

  306. Darleen says:

    I bet basement boy can’t even say how Chomsky is a Jew while supporting Islamist terrorists and advocating Israel’s destruction.

    All those icky, synagogue attending, Zionist beings… Not Real Jews at all!!1!!1!

  307. thor says:

    Comment by Mark A. Flacy on 12/31 @ 12:47 am #

    thor: trollhammered
    parsnip: trollhammered

    They have no redeeming features.

    Mark A. Flacy: douchenozzled.

    If there’s any redeeming value in a turd that Larry Craig dropped in an adult diaper during an extended infantilism and mommy fetish sex session, Mark A. Flacy is of less value than said fetishized turd. But a really solid retard’s art work made from poo, he’d be of equal value, maybe.

    I wonder how long until Bristol is pregnant again. Let’s see, there’s her own Tripp, and there’s already a Track, a Willow, a Trigg and what’s the other Palin dorks’ name, anyone? Oh yeah, Piper, named after the plane. I’m going to lay odds on the next Palin carpet monkey being named Dickie, as in Dickie’s overalls, or maybe Turkey, as in the dinner.

  308. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Darleen on 12/31 @ 12:54 am #

    I bet basement boy can’t even say how Chomsky is a Jew while supporting Islamist terrorists and advocating Israel’s destruction.

    All those icky, synagogue attending, Zionist beings… Not Real Jews at all!!1!!1!

    He’s one by birth, as is Eric Hobsbawm and Annie Leibovitz, and Linda McCartney for that matter. Duh.

    Does all the rank shit you whelp that goes against the teachings of Jesus Christ disallow you from being a Christian?

    That’s how that works.

  309. NotSure says:

    “Well it was intended as a sarcastic dig at thor, but since you have been wrong about everything else about me there is no reason to spoil a perfect record.”

    No worries B Moe. It’s all good.

  310. B Moe says:

    Have you ever considered using a split screen to watch and listen to Barack Obama and Sarah Palin at the same time so as to compare and contrast the two?

    With or without teleprompters? Who cares what they say, I can give a speech and say any damn thing I want. Palin has actually done something besides give speeches and run for office. However slight here resume, it is still an assload thinker than Obamas.

    20,000 stirred up hicks on one side versus 200,000 cheering Americans on the other would make for quite a visual comparison.

    But it means nothing. Unless you are selling tickets.

    Much more difficult a read than Sarah Palin’s forthcoming memoir, of that I’m callin’ a “you betcha.”

    Where they more difficult to read than Obama’s memoirs? Again, what does that have to do with anything?

    Hamas is bad enough ok, B Moe, but I think the Christians (and their latter childrens) have the priors in the killing the Jews contest, by far, both in time logged and numbers felled. Or don’t you think so?

    I was refering to thor speaking in the past tense, just pointing out that they are still being murdered by people who claim superior morals.

  311. thor says:

    It may mean nothing but a clear majority of Americans bought the Obama ticket and he’s now the new boy king.

    And the herd instinct is most often stronger than the one for self-preservation, as you know. So he’s also got that going for him.

  312. Sdferr says:

    That’s fine, and I’ll drop it hereafter as a decidedly minor matter, B Moe, but I thought the past tense was salient to the point he (seemed to me, he can speak for himself if he wishes to amplify his intent) to be making. Or to put it another way, I didn’t think the suggestion was that liberal Jews choose their politics in reaction to today’s ongoing Jew killing, but yesteryear’s. Who the “some think” refers to, I haven’t a clue.

  313. B Moe says:

    Danielle Steele sells more books than Obama, Chomsky, and all them other eggheads put together.

    She must be like the smartest person ever.

  314. thor says:

    Mine was more a pun than a parallel.

    Here you go, BMoe: http://www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk Kick ass IDF footage. I’d appreciate it if only true fans of Israel and the Israeli people were to click on my link. I don’t want to feed those hysterical non-worthy glommers who on one hand hate the Jewish culture of intellectualism and on the other want to use Israel’s military endeavors to feed their need for yah-yahs and fuck-yeahs.

  315. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by thor on 12/30 @ 11:45 pm #

    And again, Chomsky’s intellectual creds do not mitigate his morals.

    What’s so immoral about having flamboyant political opinions?”

    “The Khmer Rouge are tne cats pajamas” is not a “flamboyant political opinion”, you fucking retard, it’s aiding and abetting genocide.

    Gen-o-cide. The reactionary leftists favorite passtime.

    Not only are you crazy and stupid, thor, you’re a moral degenerate.

    Great package you got going there.

  316. thor says:

    Well, you wittle mentally disturbed combat boot licker, was it not Communist Vietnam that took out the Khmer Rouge while you tongue-wrestled you soldier boots?

    C’mon weepy pussy, zieg hiel buck-toothed hick, tell me all you know of genocide. Tell me what you know of those honorable Contras shelling women and children, the children of those Sandinista peasants, you fuckin’ yellow-bellied cowardly Americanista war crimes worshiper. Ha! Yeah, maybe Sherlock Holmes can help you figure out why you’re such a coward’s coward. You figuring out what a Leftist will surely go unsolved, eh bumbling hick.

    You’re as worthless as a blood tick gnawing on a mangy hyena’s ass, good riddance to ya when you croak.

  317. B Moe says:

    . I don’t want to feed those hysterical non-worthy glommers who on one hand hate the Jewish culture of intellectualism and on the other want to use Israel’s military endeavors to feed their need for yah-yahs and fuck-yeahs.

    How about those who mostly just feel Israel is morally in the right in this fight and support their fundamental right to exist? Are they no allowed to voice their support because it isn’t “valid” or “authentic” enough for you? Maybe you should write an essay explaining this Magic Jew Theory of yours, you know your professors would eat that shit with a spoon.

    I am a fan of Ben Gurion and that ilk. The eggheads in western universities haven’t really impressed me much as far as protecting the Jewish people from pogroms and oppression.

  318. N. O'Brain says:

    Gen-o-cide, cocksucker.

    You’re defending someone who defended gen-o-cide.

    I bet you’re a big fan of the Holocaust, aren’t you, you pussy fascist wannabe.

    I’m betting the picture of Stalin on your Daddy’s basement wall gives you a woody, doesn’t it, poseur?

    I bet you’re all disappointed that the commies weren’t able to impose yet another bloodthirsty dectatorship in Central Ameraica, aren’t you, you dictator’s knob licker?

    Why don’t you go lick the glass of Lenin’s tomb?

  319. N. O'Brain says:

    “…combat boot licker”

    Plagiarism, thor.

    Tsk, tsk.

  320. N. O'Brain says:

    “…good riddance to ya when you croak.”

    I’ll be missed, thor. I have people who actually love me.

    You?

    They’ll be breaking out the champagne at your demise.

  321. Móði says:

    As I suppose you can have always advocated for, nor the 747’s head if you have nothing in the sunset, even seen pictures of your literalist Céline soul.

    Be now were take up the kind the fish are not a dump in just ask a weasel-fuckin’ redumblican. To Mexico with eachs youthful redumblican President of a suspect.

    Not me, it on the unfurling of any managerial or don’t think he’s a patriotic family, the retreat of hick shiteaters.

  322. N. O'Brain says:

    What propitiates any incomprehensible invention through the philanthropist?

  323. N. O'Brain says:

    The government indelibly jumped the experienced psychologist, thus the facetiously accidental town sadistically insanely passes her star.

  324. Carin says:

    hate the Jewish culture of intellectualism and on the other want to use Israel’s military endeavors to feed their need for yah-yahs and fuck-yeahs.

    Hating Chomsky’s political bullshit doesn’t mean you hate Jews.

    Regardless, the Jews that I personally know who actually go to synagog support Israel and are pretty anti-terrorist.

  325. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    So, let me get this straight:

    “Disagrees with Chomsky’s dullwitted terrorist/communist dicksucking” = “Hates Jews”.

    “Supports Hamas” = “Friend of the Jewish people”.

    All righty, then.

  326. Ric Locke says:

    Bah. Please note that this has worked around to comparing the intellectual capacity of Sarah Palin to that of Noam Chomsky. It’s another symptom of the terror the pseudointellectual Left has for Palin, and by extension her admirers and supporters, i.e., the people they have to rob in order to be “generous”.

    Noam Chomsky is a brilliant theorist in linguistics who worked everything out in detail. Unfortunately, as we are daily discovering, his fundamental assumptions were wrong, so the fact that his math is correct and his reasoning impeccable simply leads inevitably to wrong conclusions. There’s no particular dishonor in that. Negative results are as good as positive ones and sometimes better, and there are brilliant people in physics who spend a lifetime trying to tease special cases out of the equations of relativity in order to get predictions small enough to be susceptible to experiment and failing (those equations are hard). If they used temporary or apparent success in that endeavor to claim expertise in biology or politics, we would sneer at them, and be right to do so. The Shockley example works against thor’s position, not for it.

    Derrida’s premise is absolutely correct: in any “work”, a substantial component comes from conscious or (more problematically) unconscious cultural assumptions which may have led away from a correct conclusion and toward an incorrect one. Science fiction is full of stories in which Isaac Newton, or some other early scientist, made a wrong turn or ignored some evidence out of cultural assumptions, and as a result humans as a whole failed to notice the basic principles of, say, interstellar starships. Derrida proposes a specific technique to strip the cultural and social assumptions out of the work, leaving the substantive reasoning behind; in this way, if there are errors they will become apparent, and another thinker can proceed from correcting them to correct or more-correct conclusions. Academia, today, has stripped the “if” out of that last sentence — the errors are assumed a priori, and the task of the academic is to twist the process around until an error is demonstrated. If there really were a “white male physics” consciously or unconsciously skewed to disadvantage women and minorities, an analysis a la Derrida would reveal the distortions. So far no such distortions have been discovered, but there are reams of scholarly works claiming to find them, and displaying their own flawed assumptions, stereotyping, and bigotry in the process. The situation is another instance of “figures don’t lie, but liars can figure”.

    Regards,
    Ric

  327. Carin says:

    Bah. Please note that this has worked around to comparing the intellectual capacity of Sarah Palin to that of Noam Chomsky.

    In addition, let it be noted that intelligence has no bearing on character, judgement, or ability.

  328. JHoward says:

    I don’t know how you manage to stick around, Ric. Not sure whether to salute you or pity you. Consider the sheer self-delusion (not to specifically mention the, as has been noted, moral degeneracy):


    20,000 stirred up hicks on one side versus 200,000 cheering Americans on the other would make for quite a visual comparison.

    For a guy as bent in half as this one, one expects no less than such fantasy. 200,000 stirred up malcontents and me-firsters on one side versus 20,000 cheering Americans on the other did make for quite a visual comparison.

    At any rate, soldier on. Black has become white.

  329. Mr. Pink says:

    If you break down Thor’s comments to their building blocks all you get is: “Becasue your political opinions differ from mine, you are dumb and evil while I am smart and good. F@ck you thuglican, facists, racists, hicks.”

  330. N. O'Brain says:

    Up is down. Hy is Lois.

    Cats and dogs living together…..

  331. Percy Dovetonsils says:

    Shields is Yarnell?

  332. JHoward says:

    Socialism is markets.

  333. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Ric Locke: Unfortunately, as we are daily discovering, his fundamental assumptions were wrong

    Wrong in the sense of not providing an adequate model of natural languages, but not completely wrong. Chomsky’s work does a wizard job at modeling computer languages, and most compilers are based on his theories. I’d characterize his linguistic work as useful, but insufficient. Of course, he hasn’t published anything of note in his substantive field for about forty years.

    As you say, though, even if Chomsky’s model were a perfect explanation of natural languages, it wouldn’t have jack shit to do with the validity of his politics. I noted something similar above in regard to Newt Gingrich and “global warming”. Gingrich has a doctorate in history, which could, at most, be taken as evidence that he’s an expert on history. I’m pretty sure you don’t have to study nonlinear dynamics to get a history degree (and equally sure that you don’t have to study the War of the Austrian Succession to get a degree in climate physics).

    Argumentum ad verecundiam.

  334. Nine-of-Diamonds says:

    Thor, several months ago, on Jamaican women: “I suspect [my “hot” Russian girlfriend] was suspicious of my natural inclination to local untamed mountain pussy. That’s what you get for sharing your fantasies. I’ve always wanted to have a village to a all night drum dance while I spear a virgin in a thatched hut, like every deserving White God gets to do.”

    Thor @ # 236 – “Ah, we have a visiting racist. Shocka!”

    Yes, in fact, we do have a visiting racist. Took him long enough to figure it out.

    And as for the Magic Negro graduating Magna Cum Laude, who cares? MCL’s totally meaningless without a transcript. It’s not exactly a well-kept secret that you can boost your GPA by taking heavily-politicized courses – Queer Studies and the Law, African Americans and the Law, Interpretative Dance & Marxist Legal Theory, etc. Corporations & firms looking for token minorities often overlook these items on blacks’ transcripts – after all, having an underqualified employee may well be less costly than dealing with a diversity shakedown later on…

  335. N. O'Brain says:

    #Comment by Nine-of-Diamonds on 12/31 @ 9:15 am #

    Robert A. Heinlein wrote a piece in one of his novels about how someone can actually earn a doctorate without learning a single thing.

    I think the field he used in the story was “Education”.

  336. B Moe says:

    He hasn’t released anything from his Columbia days, which leads me to question how he got into Harvard in the first place.

  337. N. O'Brain says:

    HAH! Proof that Booosh is a moron:

    Karl Rove (KARL ROVE!!!!) beat him 3 YEARS RUNNING in the number of books each of them read!!

    In 2005: “At year’s end, I defeated the president, 110 books to 95.”

    And it goes on and on and on!

    What an incurious lout Booosh is!!!

    http://sec.online.wsj.com/article/SB123025595706634689.html

  338. Carin says:

    A good-natured competition helps keep him centered and makes possible a clear mind and a high level of energy. He reads instead of watching TV. He reads on Air Force One and to relax and because he’s curious. He reads about the tasks at hand, often picking volumes because of the relevance to his challenges.

    I’d like to see how my liberal New-York tv-hating friends would spin that.

  339. Ric Locke says:

    Wrong in the sense of not providing an adequate model of natural languages, but not completely wrong.

    Yep. I’ve been trying for the last hour, as I fed the critters and opened the store, to figure out a way to explain how that is without descending into jargon (which I don’t have a good handle on, in any case). Jeff can make jargon comprehensible, at least in context. I have no such skill.

    The best I’ve come up with so far is to invoke Newton. Newton’s theories lead to a mechanistic or mechanical Universe; using Newtonian mechanics, if you could know the position, velocity, mass, electrical charge, etc. of every particle in the Universe — what is called the state vector — at any given instant, you could calculate the state vector at any other instant. This falls down in three ways. First, Universe is very large, perhaps infinite. If you could determine such a state vector, you would have to “write it down”, and in order to do that you would have to encode it — and encoding it means changing (at least some subset of) the individual state vectors or particles; you can’t write it down without ink! This leads eventually to the conclusion that the only possible encoding of the state vector of Universe is Universe itself. Second, there are effects and forces that Newton didn’t know about, and which don’t follow the relatively simple action-reaction paradigm his theories are based on. Third, and consequent to the first two, is the notion of emergent properties — a complex system cannot be fully predicted based on an analysis of its components. Amoebas are a single cell. Critters, including you and me, are made up of multiple cells. No analysis, however exhaustive, of amoebas will predict, say, thor’s #327.

    Chomsky’s linguistic theories have the same flaw. He starts, quite reasonably, with things observed across languages — for instance, the near-universal voiced labial “m-” to refer to at least the mammary gland, and most often the female parent — and the near-universal assumption that such things are the result of human physiology. From there he assumes that all features of language are the simple result of human physiology, and delves into neuropsychology and brain-activity studies to establish what features of physiology give rise to language. It’s all very Newtonian and mechanistic, and, like Newtonian physics, fails before complexity.

    One of Robert Heinlein’s en passant predictions was “Loglan” or “Logical Language”, an artificial construct in which it was impossible to construct a contradictory statement (“wrong” statements are possible, as is clear, but result from not knowing enough of the initial conditions.) You could construct Loglan from Chomsky’s theories, and the game might be worth the candle — it would, among other things, be a universal programming language, which is what Heinlein predicted it would be used for. It would be a lousy vehicle for poetry, and translating James Joyce into Loglan would be impossible.

    Regards,
    Ric

  340. N. O'Brain says:

    “I’d like to see how my liberal New-York tv-hating friends would spin that.”

    ‘Yeah, “My Pet Goat”!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!’

    [how’s that?]

  341. Rusty says:

    Such a monumental waste of bandwidth.

    What was the topic, again?

  342. Ric Locke says:

    Threads drift, Rusty. Live with it.

    Regards,
    Ric

  343. ballyfager says:

    I didn’t read all the comments but I’m sure that this thought has already been said many times herein: It’s frightening to think about what goes through the minds of the people you’re on this planet with.

  344. N. O'Brain says:

    What “minds”?

  345. TheUnrepentantGeek says:

    Ah Thor.

    Perhaps some day I’ll be struck with an epiphany, declare you right about everything, and turn my back on my redumblican ways. But you’ll still be cruel to people you don’t even know for no better reason than that they say things you didn’t like.

    Right, left, center, or other – politics change, but asshole is eternal.

  346. thor says:

    Ric, I’m on vacation. I don’t have my papers nor my books as references, but there was nothing wrong with Chomsky’s published papers from the mid ’50’s, which he did while at Harvard with that other dude who I can’t recall the name of, and his Syntactic Structures from ’57 is still considered cornerstone work for linguistic theory, which is considered a generative theory. His work led others to advanced morhposyntax theory (sentence structures), which means, as sPies referenced earlier, Chomsky’s papers on natural languages and syntactical structures led others to study natural language as it relates to music theory and then they used Chomsky’s models to breakdown more highly inflective languages, which Roman Jakobson first did much of. Eventually Chomsky’s linguistic models were the basis for Lofti Zadeh’s theories that broke down the parameters of syntactical sets, which is what they call fuzzy logic, which is credited with helping advance computer programming languages (by helping bridge the gap between computer language from natural language, if you will). That’s that in a nutshell. So, as you can see, Chomsky’s place in the arcane studies of phonological analysis and comparative language theories is well earned and, no matter if you’re a generative grammarian or not, is what Chomsky is actually noted for. His political blatherings are a side show to his actual work.

    One can say that after Chomsky’s papers were originally published the study of linguistics was never the same again. That’s your marker.

    How this all relates to the topic at hand is that Chomsky was born a Jew and therefore now emblematic. To Darleen he’s emblematic for evil double-crossing of Judaism, to others he’s emblematic of an extreme elevation in linguistic studies, and for others, for me as well, he’s emblematic of the European Jews respect for and advancement of intellectualism.

    I proffer that anyone who dithers of Chomsky as evil has no understanding of the the Jewish culture of intellectualism therefore is motivated by the convenience of cheap symbolism.

    Now, back to calling P’Brain childish names.

    Fuck you P’Brain, you cowardly Larry Craigian cracker!

  347. B Moe says:

    I proffer that anyone who dithers of Chomsky as evil has no understanding of the the Jewish culture of intellectualism therefore is motivated by the convenience of cheap symbolism.

    You can keep asserting it all you want to, but until you explain how intellectualism is an insulator to evil I don’t think anyone is going to go for it.

  348. Rusty says:

    #353
    Pfffft! Merde.

    #357
    I’m impressed! very good, for a sixteen year old.

  349. thor says:


    Comment by TheUnrepentantGeek on 12/31 @ 11:43 am #

    Ah Thor.

    Perhaps some day I’ll be struck with an epiphany, declare you right about everything, and turn my back on my redumblican ways. But you’ll still be cruel to people you don’t even know for no better reason than that they say things you didn’t like.

    Right, left, center, or other – politics change, but asshole is eternal.

    My-my, the old eternalness of the crossed-political assholian spectrum theory has been laid on the table once again. You’re no Chomsky, you!

    At your first convenience do note that oft times I’m hammering the heads of the mud latrine and hand-dug bunker crowd here, eh, ya trucky yammering laddie.

  350. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Rusty on 12/31 @ 1:20 pm #

    #353
    Pfffft! Merde.

    #357
    I’m impressed! very good, for a sixteen year old.

    Applying Chomsky’s comparative adolescence contextualization theory’s calculations results in your estimated age being just passed the age of two.

    Speaking of outhouse hicktards, good morning, Rusty.

  351. Darleen says:

    for me as well, he’s emblematic of the European Jews respect for and advancement of intellectualism.

    In 1920 the chief rabbi of Moscow, Jacob Mazeh, went to Leon Trosky, nee Bronstein, in asking that the Red Army be used to protect Russian Jews from pogroms.

    Trotsky said: “Why do you come to me? I am not a Jew.”

    Mazeh replied: “That’s the tragedy. It’s the Trotskys who make revolutions, and it’s the Bronsteins who pay the price.”

    thor, like his infallible hero Chomsky, would rather the Bronsteins just die. They SUCH an embarrassment!

  352. thor says:

    I’m not apt to jump to any conclusions from your citing simple-minded one-off examples, Darleen. How many times have I stated the selection and non-selection of texts is a rhetorical ploy dating back to the days of the Greek philosophy?

    You have no claim to the intellectual passion of European Jewry. You’re more typical of your Hamas sisters.

  353. Darleen says:

    nishi-like, thor, you ignore Chomsky’s contemporary immorality in thrall to his past intellectualism and you make unsubstantiated assertions that I have no connection to “European Jewry”. Jewry you reject.

    sad little covetous basement boy

  354. thor says:

    And what’s up with your continual diversion from the saintliness of small business owners who prime the economic engine of America, and “who hail from the more patriotic states” as Sarah Palin would add.

    How’d I go from econo-hero of Palin into your pathetic daddy’s money fantasy?

    And I don’t ignore Chomksy’s political asides, I simply say he has a right to them, dorko. Yours is the failed recognition-equates-complicity redumblican logic in overdrive.

  355. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    hammeridiot: Eventually Chomsky’s linguistic models were the basis for Lofti Zadeh’s theories that broke down the parameters of syntactical sets, which is what they call fuzzy logic, which is credited with helping advance computer programming languages (by helping bridge the gap between computer language from natural language, if you will). That’s that in a nutshell.

    If by “that’s that” you mean “that’s a load of utter crap”, you have a point.

    Zadeh’s work has little to nothing to do with Chomsky’s linguistic models, and (far from “advancing programming languages”) has almost no application in general practice (it’s useful in a few specialized scenarios).

    Most fuzzy logic work is done in Prolog, which existed long before Zadeh came up with the concept.

    For the studio audience: “Fuzzy logic” was the “chaos theory” of the 1980s — i.e., a term bruited about by pseudointellectuals in contexts to which it demonstrably does not apply.

    Ric Locke: One of Robert Heinlein’s en passant predictions was “Loglan” or “Logical Language”…it would, among other things, be a universal programming language

    Actually, Loglan really exists, but (as far as I can tell) it only covers first-order predicate calculus, which isn’t sufficient for universal computation.

    We have lots of universal programming languages — one of the fundamental results of computer science is that, given a reasonable, if slightly fuzzy, definition of what is meant by “computable”, a very, very simple computer can perform any calculation that can be performed by any computer. “Very simple” equates to a machine equipped with a tape unit, which can make or erase a mark on the tape and move the tape forward or backward one position at a time. The machine is equipped with a set of rules of the form “If you are in state 234, and there is a mark on the tape, erase it” or “If you are in state 519, and there is a blank on the tape, move one square to the left”. This is called a Universal Turing Machine, and every machine we have (even the experimental quantum computers) is functionally equivalent to it (actually, real machines are less powerful, because the conceptual Turing Machine has an unlimited amount of tape — it’s semi-infinite, having a beginning, but no fixed end)).

    So why use other programming languages? Because they provide convenience. Turing machines are a real bitch to program. They’re also a real bitch to make run fast (the thesis says nothing about the speed or efficiency of completing the job, only that it can be done).

    The languages recognized by Turing Machines are the so-called “recursively enumerable” languagues, which correspond to Chomsky’s type 0 grammars.

    Even in this highly abstract and simple model, though, uncertainty comes into play. It can be shown that the so-called “Halting Problem” (given an arbitrary Turing machine and an arbitrary tape, will the machine eventually halt if it is run on the tape?) is undecidable. You simply can’t construct a proof which will answer that question for an arbitrary machine (note that this is only true for the general case — certainly in specific cases it’s possible to determine that the Turing machine halts; a degenerate Turing machine in which every state and every input mapped to halt would be a trivial example).

    In itself this is a mildly troubling result, but it gets worse. Lots of other problems can be shown to be equivalent to the Halting Problem – so there’s a whole set of problems that no computer (as we currently understand them) will ever solve.

    This is closely related to the similar issues of undecidability raised by Gödel in the realm of arithmetic (Gödel is another favorite of the intellectual dilettante set, by the way, right along with “fuzzy logic” and “chaos theory”).

    And, of course, there are formal grammars which fall right outside of the Chomsky hierarchy.

    The (unsolved) question arises: are human brains Turing machines?

    My hunch is no.

    P.S. the last time thor started bloviating about this stuff, I asked him to construct a very basic proof. Needless to say, he couldn’t do it.

    Oh, rats. I missed Rush and Sean Hannity. That’ll teach my stupid redumblican hick ass to meddle in the affairs of my betters.

  356. Nine-of-Diamonds says:

    Redumblikkkan! Larry Craig! RAY-CIST! Redumblikkkan! Larry Craig! RAY-CIST!

    “nishi-like, thor, you ignore Chomsky’s contemporary immorality in thrall to his past intellectualism and you make unsubstantiated assertions that I have no connection to “European Jewry”. Jewry you reject.”

    Also – where does he get off equating Chomsky’s idiocy with “Jewish Intellectual Culture” as a whole?
    Seems like a crude attempt to make criticism of Chomsky anti-semitic by default.

  357. thor says:

    Zadeh’s work has little to nothing to do with Chomsky’s linguistic models, and (far from “advancing programming languages”) has almost no application in general practice (it’s useful in a few specialized scenarios).

    Most fuzzy logic work is done in Prolog, which existed long before Zadeh came up with the concept.

    For the studio audience: “Fuzzy logic” was the “chaos theory” of the 1980s — i.e., a term bruited about by pseudointellectuals in contexts to which it demonstrably does not apply.

    In the context of attempting a simple to understand explanation, yes Chomsky leads to Zadeh, math dick wannabe. And you’re a pseudointellectual thus yours is conflicted fuzzy logic, pun intended.

    Until next year.

  358. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    In the context of attempting a simple to understand explanation, yes Chomsky leads to Zadeh, math dick wannabe.

    Translation: you jabbered about something you don’t understand. Again. You got called on it. Again. You then resulted to dullwitted, repetitive insults from your limited supply of same. Again.

    Happy New Year, fraudboy.

  359. thor says:

    BTW, you’re correct, Godel, chaos theory and Zadeh’s fuzzy logic are weeds in the same garden, I mean, if you want to be that simple about it.

  360. thor says:

    Linguistic sets, dumbass.

  361. thor says:

    Pwn3d.

    You’re done!

    [thought I’d beat you to your usual dumbassed and predictable I-win-I-win declaration]

  362. Darleen says:

    SBP

    thor is doing his Walter Mitty bit again, and when caught at it, hisses like a bald tire ready to blow.

  363. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Whatever gets you through the night, thor.

    Snicker.

  364. Nine-of-Diamonds says:

    “P.S. the last time thor started bloviating about this stuff, I asked him to construct a very basic proof. Needless to say, he couldn’t do it.”

    But…but…Larry Craig! Mark Foley!

    1) Scan Wikipedia or its equivalent, claiming expertise you lack.
    2) Panic once you get called on your ignorance.
    3) Start ranting about gay Redumblikkkans and declare victory.

    That reminds me – I wonder where ol’ Barrett Brown is? I miss him – he was always good for a laugh. Someone once asked him how 0bama would advance Libertarian principles – his response was so mind-blowingly asinine I couldn’t stop laughing. Time to scan the archives again…

  365. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    thor is doing his Walter Mitty

    More like Jethro Bodine, I’d say.

    Remember how he claimed to be a fry cook one week, a brain surgeon the next, and a “double-naught spy” the week after that?

    That’s our thor.

  366. Ric Locke says:

    SBP,

    Yes, Loglan exists, but not Heinlein’s Loglan, which was a general purpose language usable by humans and computers. It may or may not be a possible construct; it’s SF, after all.

    Thank you for the explanation(s), which refreshed some of the jargon. It’s been a while. I remember when Fuzzy Logic was The! Solution! Once I figured out that it was just a way of codifying what I’d been doing all along — I did learn some techniques useful for quickly approximating PID loops, leading to things like quick and dirty motor controls — I lost interest, and never learned Prolog. (I’m one of those weirdos who actually prefers assembly language. I also prefer hand tools.)

    Now that they are no longer fashionable, chaos theory and its relative complexity theory are back in the rearmost cubicles, serving primarily as ways for geeks to play (and invent) really cool computer games on somebody else’s nickel, but there are a few results relating to “emergent properties”. If there’s much of general utility it’s behind classification walls, but there’s still some possibility it’ll produce something useful, so it keeps a little funding.

    Regards,
    Ric

  367. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    PID controllers, definitely a good application.

    All of those things are cool, and interesting and (sometimes) useful.

    It just irritates the crap out of me when poseurs like nishi and thor jump on a breathless write-up they’ve read in some pop-sci rag and start claiming expertise.

  368. Rusty says:

    #361
    Missed again. Do keep trying.

  369. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 12/31 @ 9:12 pm #

    PID controllers, definitely a good application.

    All of those things are cool, and interesting and (sometimes) useful.

    It just irritates the crap out of me when poseurs like nishi and thor jump on a breathless write-up they’ve read in some pop-sci rag and start claiming expertise.

    I wrote one thesis paper which involved aspects of Chomsky’s syntactic theories and Zadeh’s fuzzy logic to satisfy the requirements of an independent study course, so yeah, it was rather lengthy, and yeah, it required the assistance of a PhD in mathematics to proof. Gee, and I recall mentioning those specifics. But that you don’t know Zadeh is the father of fuzzy logic and, further, that you couldn’t answer even one of three very basic questions concerning set theory that I posted is/was all I need to know of your math theory bravado.

    Nay, I’m no expert, did more than my share of stats and calculus though. But you, sPies, you’re as total a fuckin’ idiot in politics as you are in any academic discipline, as far as I can tell, anyway. Plus your whole abrasive hypothesis of if one disagrees with nishi she then therefore fucks reptiles, or that if I dare mention that I went fishing that I must’a came home with nothin’ but stinky fingers, cause I voted Dem!, is ignoble to the last degree. Nietzche’s Beyond Good and Evil might be a tad misguided, but I’d enjoy hearing of your being beaten with the heaviest hard copy ever published.

    Suggestion: look those up, herr archive quotin’ tWo-oF-CluBSSs. Look, bunnies!11!! RaY-cISt!!elevanty11!!!!! It saddens me to advise you that whatever logic can be found in your prior post is so disjointed that your effort resembles the empty tin cup of a beggar who failed to attract a penance of wanting attention. More simply put, your barbs are not of the carefully polished kind. Do spare us/me in the future, if you’d be so kind.

    Ric, I don’t think so. My relation to the L-29 wasn’t stateside (and Czechs made them, I thought). I had free advertising space available to me in Moscow and by sheer coincidence that jet joy ride business simply fell into my lap, unless, of course, you were one of my customers whom I never cared to “grip’n’greet,” as Sarah Palin describes a patronizing smirk and a hard-pumping handshake.

    Happy 2009, skee wankers.

  370. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    I wrote one thesis paper which involved aspects of Chomsky’s syntactic theories and Zadeh’s fuzzy logic to satisfy the requirements of an independent study course

    Whoopty shit. Sandra Harding wrote a paper arguing that Newton’s Principia Mathematica was a “rape manual”. Hint: it isn’t.

    it required the assistance of a PhD in mathematics to proof.

    So you wrote a “thesis paper” on material that you don’t understand.

    Nice trick.

    But that you don’t know Zadeh is the father of fuzzy logic

    Evidence that I didn’t know this? And what difference would it make if I didn’t? Fuzzy logic is a backwater. I noted that it’s useful in certain highly specific situations, but it’s way, way out of the mainstream.

    that you couldn’t answer even one of three very basic questions concerning set theory

    Another lie.

    You’re a braggart and a liar, thor. And you’ve been exposed as such.

    Again.

  371. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Sandra Harding wrote a paper

    Correction: a book.

  372. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Here is the thread</a that thor is babbling about.

    I draw particular attention to posts #88, #92, #96-99, #194, #205-207 and #257.

    I leave it up to the interested reader (if there are any) to determine who was “owned” in that thread.

  373. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Fixed link.

  374. Pablo says:

    SB&P, you should probably just TrollHammer him. He’s not convincing anyone of anything and at some point, you’re just trying to teach a pig to sing. If that amuses you, carry on, but don’t take the effort seriously. Enjoy the new year and don’t let the troll under your skin.

  375. thor says:

    Comment by thor on 6/23 @ 10:53 pm #

    “With the _______ you can fuzzify any domains of math reasoning using set theory.

    That’s a pretty basic question. And that’s the name of one chapter I’m working through right now. If you teach this then you’re a bigger math weenie than I, but since you’re also a typical dick then mocking you will become a membership function (A) of my universe of discourse (X). XsubscriptA (X) = 1

    Have you had enough time, sPies, it’s been 6-months? And it truly is an easy question.

    So what is it sPies, can ya fill in the blank and come up with the name a chapter in a math text? Can ya admit Lofti Zadeh isn’t a pseudointellectual – EvEn if hE no rUSh LiMMMMbaUgH geNUIs – or had you the faintest idea of Zadeh’s work before you oh-so recently looked him up using Wikipedia?

    I guess I need to add this is proof I TOTALLY OWN YOU!!!sevanty!!!, in keeping with your steamy and lively level of discourse.

    I’ll let others have a good laugh before I dig out those other questions that befuddled you, you pWn3D ((!!total!!ownage!!)) little half-man.

    Barack Obama, Booo!

  376. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Have you had enough time, sPies, it’s been 6-months?

    I don’t have your textbook, thor, so I can’t answer the “fill in the blank” question. Sorry.

    The fact that you confuse regurgitation from a textbook that you don’t understand with proof speaks volumes.

    How’s that proof coming along, thor?

    Prove that the set of recursively enumerable languages is closed under intersection and union, but not under complementation.

    Here, I’ll even make it easy for you: everything you need to construct the proof is on this page, assuming that you understand a) basic set operations (such as union, intersection, and complement) and b) understand basic mathematical reasoning. You don’t even need to know anything about formal languages.

  377. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Can ya admit Lofti Zadeh isn’t a pseudointellectual

    He’s a real scientist.

    The pseudointellectuals are those (such as yourself) who insist on applying his work in areas to which it demonstrably does not apply.

  378. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    BTW, I suspect thor’s “question” came from this book, which is a piece of pop-sci crap.

    I can’t be bothered to go down to the library and look, though.

  379. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Bye, thor.

    Back in the troll bin you go, with a hearty bellylaugh to speed you on your way.

    Fraud.

  380. guinsPen says:

    [he’s] doing his Walter Mitty bit again, and when caught at it, hisses like a bald tire ready to blow.

    The hissing of the tire increased: thor-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa.

    With apologies.

  381. thor says:


    Comment by Nine-of-Diamonds on 12/31 @ 9:15 am #

    And as for the Magic Negro graduating Magna Cum Laude, who cares? MCL’s totally meaningless without a transcript. It’s not exactly a well-kept secret that you can boost your GPA by taking heavily-politicized courses – Queer Studies and the Law, African Americans and the Law, Interpretative Dance & Marxist Legal Theory, etc. Corporations & firms looking for token minorities often overlook these items on blacks’ transcripts – after all, having an underqualified employee may well be less costly than dealing with a diversity shakedown later on…

    You’ve attended Harvard Law? No, I suspect not. Attended law school? No, I suspect not. Grad school? No, I suspect not. Do tell me if my suspicions are wrong.

    Allow me to let you in on a little secret, as long as we’re sharing secrets!, often you can choose between tracks that have an emphasis in certain areas of academic study, but graduate level degree programs aren’t like the salad bar of course options one sees when acquiring a general studies AA degree, so sorry.

    I’ll let you in on another secret, far fewer professors, as in no grad students teaching watered down night classes, unless you’re in for a executive MBA, then you’re classes are probably all on-line or held during weekend retreats where you get to sing cumbayah, ha!

    Nah, gay Foleycan, I’ve seen some grad classes with topics like Symbolism in Native American Graffiti and then looked and noted the prof. Ya see, LarrY cRaigian redumblican, no matter if your clownish head spins with laughter from the tone of a class’s title, that particular prof might be one you wouldn’t suffer through easily. He/she’d require tons of work, opposite of your airheaded impression. That’s how to better judge grad classes, by the prof, but it’s a secret, OK.

    Have any other balloon theories I can pop, airhead?

  382. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 11:26 am #

    Bye, thor.

    Back in the troll bin you go, with a hearty bellylaugh to speed you on your way.

    Fraud.

    Geez, you’re such an expert on set theory and fuzzy logic and Chomsky’s math, do I really need to dig out those other basic questions you failed to answer? I must simply be boring you with such basic stuff. That’s it.

    Let’s rewind time for a moment, I, I admit, was feeling good about myself and my newly acquired knowledge of math and language philosophies, frankly, it was an angle I thought would best bore the shit out of my English Lit prof and get me a decent grade for no other reason than the weight of my paper tipped the required scales. I’ve stated that originally. No more would I be required to write a follow up to further substantiate my weak reference to some weird Wiggensteininnian notion. My clever angle is all I’ve ever bragged about. And it worked.

    Me no say me gots no advanced degree in math. Me just a pobrescito!

    It was you who jumped onto the dorsal fin of this shark. You supposedly teach this shit! And Chomksy’s the easy stuff! So, c’mon, when I get home I’ll pull some books from my shelf with titles such as selected writings of Chomsky and Zadeh and let’s see how you do on a pop quiz, mmkay, sPies.

  383. thor says:

    And the crickets go “chirp, chirp.”

  384. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    I never claimed to be an expert on fuzzy logic, thor.

    That was you.

    But by all means continue lying and claiming that typing in shit from textbooks you don’t understand constitutes a proof of something, other than the (painfully obvious) fact that you’re a gigantic intellectual fraud.

    I’ll give you another fifteen minutes before I post the proof, which I just constructed from scratch in less than five minutes.

    I’ll even give you a bigger hint: start with definition 3 in that Wikipedia article.

  385. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    That chirping you hear is people laughing at you, thor.

  386. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    BTW, I already said I had no interest in answering “fill in the blank” questions you’ve copied from your textbooks.

    That proves nothing except that you own the textbook.

    Whoopty-shit.

  387. thor says:

    No sPies, my question to you comes from the first line of the chapter, as I recall.

    You’re easily stumped for a math genius.

  388. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    my question to you comes from the first line of the chapter,

    Which proves that you own the book.

    Nothing else.

    How’s that proof coming along, thor?

    Snicker.

  389. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Time’s up, thor.

    Given: languages A and B, such that A and B are recursively enumerable
    Prove: 1) A (intersect) B is recursively enumerable.
    2) A (union) B is recursively enumerable.
    3) The complements of A and B are not necessarily recursively enumerable.

    Proof 1: If A and B are recursively enumerable, there exist Turing machines At and Bt which will halt in an accept state when presented with strings in languages A and B, respectively. Since A (intersect) B is the set of strings which are in both languages, a Turing machine Ct can be constructed which consists of machines At and Bt. If a string S is in language A, machine At will halt and accept when presented with S (by definition). If S is also in language B, machine Bt will halt and accept when presented with S (also by definition). Thus, if *both* machines halt, S is in both languages A and B. QED.

    Proof 2: A (union) B is the set of strings which are in either language. As before, construct a composite machine, Ct, from At and Bt. If S is in A, machine At will halt and accept. If S is in B, Bt will halt and accept. Thus, if *either* machine halts, S is in A (union) B. QED.

    Proof 3: Consider the complement of A, A’. This is the set of all strings which are NOT in language A. Now, consider the operation of machine At when presented with a string which is not in its language. There are two alternatives: 1) the machine may halt in a reject state 2) the machine may enter an infinite loop. Case 1 presents no problem, since we can construct a machine At’ which is the logical inversion of machine At (i.e., reject and accept states are simply switched). Case 2 is different. Since At runs forever, At’ will also run forever, violating the assumption that At’ will halt in an accept state when presented with a string in A’. QED.

  390. thor says:

    Don’t get me wrong, sPies, I’m more than willing to ask you for some proofies. I’ll email my math prof friend who actually has a PhD in math from one of those uber-liberal universities in the northeast (U. of Maryland, I think) and I’m sure I can provide you with some proofy questions that’d be easy for a big-time politically conservative intellectual math-type to wail on. If that’s your preference, I can do it.

    I’m only good for asking really basic stuff. Chomsky?

    _______ and ______ theory assumes the framework of x-bar syntax to constrain categorial components.

    Don’t laugh, I’m not too advanced with this stuff, especially without any of my books. But maybe you could fill in the blanks, that “and” is such a big giveaway that I’m embarrassed.

    Thanks for your proof, btw, but now please answer my much simpler question at your convenience.

  391. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    I’ll email my math prof friend who actually has a PhD in math

    I have friends with PhDs in all kinds of things, thor. Dozens of fields.

    Buh-bye, fraud.

  392. thor says:

    That’s an impressive performance, you’re being able to spell friends, but I don’t believe you have any.

    I think your troll box is a fraud. Probably you have a box full of inanimate objects, most likely white cotton socks, that you like to converse with.

  393. thor says:

    Stumped again?

    Answer: Government and Binding.

    You sure know your Chomsky!

  394. Ric Locke says:

    Actually, SBP, you don’t need language theory to prove that. Set theory suffices.

    Given: Sets A and B, such that A (intersect) B is not empty. (Note that for this statement to be true, neither A nor B can be empty.)

    Then A (intersect) (complement A) is the empty set, from the definition of “complement”.

    Since all members of A (intersect) B are members of A, it follows that (A (intersect) B) intersect (complement A) is empty.

    The union case isn’t much more complex.

    Regards,
    Ric

  395. thor says:

    Now there’s a man with some extra time on his hands.

  396. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Ric, it’s three separate cases, not a combination of the three.

    A (intersect) B is recursively enumerable.
    A (union) B is recursively enumerable.
    A’ is not necessarily recursively enumerable.

    But, as you say, you don’t need to know anything specific about formal languages.

  397. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    BTW, I put thor back in the troll bin.

    If he says anything relevant or interesting, I’m sure someone else will let me know.

  398. thor says:

    I’m sorry, Ric, but I think our resident expert on Chomsky may need your help. If I ask him a question wherein the answer isn’t forthcoming by doing a Wiki search of “Noam Chomsky” he seems to stumble.

    And he teaches Chomsky, it’s the “easy” stuff; that’s how sPies describes dumb Leftist Noam’s chops.

    While he’s pretending not to read my posts, would you relay to sPies that I’m laughing at him, Ric?

    Thanks in advance.

  399. cranky-d says:

    I just returned from being gone for two weeks, and all my hammers had expired. I didn’t see anything to not convince me to renew them all toot sweet.

  400. Ric Locke says:

    Given: languages A and B, such that A and B are recursively enumerable
    Prove: 1) A (intersect) B is recursively enumerable.
    2) A (union) B is recursively enumerable.
    3) The complements of A and B are not necessarily recursively enumerable.

    Or, Given sets A and B, such that A is a subset of C, B is a subset of C, and (complement) C is not empty. (There are recursively enumerable languages, but not all languages are recursively enumerable; the latter phrase is implicit in your setup, but it ought to be made explicit.)

    1) Since (by definition of subset) all elements of A are elements of C, A (intersect) B is a subset of C.

    2) Since all elements of A and all elements of B are elements of C, A (union) B is a subset of C.

    3) Since A is a subset of C, and (complement) C is not empty, (complement) A contains at least one element which is not in C.

    Triviality. Takes much longer to state it in English than it does to work it out.

    Regards,
    Ric

  401. Mikey NTH says:

    On topic – I visited my little brother and his wife and their two girls (28 months and 9 months) over Christmas.

    Very cute and very nice little kids. A good family. I disagree that the Alligator and the Onomatopoeia are viruses. I think they are hope. The Voluntary Human Extinction people can take their own advice for once (rather than force it on others). If they had the courage of their own convictions, that is.

    Which they don’t.

  402. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Ric, you’re still missing that these are phrased as independent theorems. The complement case has nothing to do with the union and intersection cases.

    For example, recursive languages are closed under intersection, union, and complementation (one way of expressing the difference between recursive and recursively enumerable is that a recursive language has a machine which halts in every case, either with halt or reject — recursive languages aren’t as powerful as RE languages).

    A set of construction proofs for recursive languages would be identical to the one for recursively enumerable languages for the union and intersection cases.

    A machine to recognize the complement of the language (the case that causes trouble with recursively enumerable languages) be handled by simply negating the output of the machine which recognizes the basic language (since the machine halts either with reject or accept, there’s no risk of running into an infinite loop).

  403. Ric Locke says:

    SBP, in a way I’m toying with you as badly as thor tries to. The way I put it isn’t useful to someone studying languages — but it’s correct, and if phrasing it in linguistics terms made it look as if it were not correct, the error would be in the phrasing. The underlying math is trivial.

    To expand: there exists a subset, L, of the Universal set called “languages”.

    There exists a subset of L, C, called “recursively enumerable languages”.

    By definition, the complement of C, C’, contains everything that is not a “recursively enumerable language”, including languages which are only “recursive”, languages which are neither recursive nor enumerable, pigs, and the Andromeda Galaxy. (Complements are like that. It tends to bite slow thinkers in the butt.)

    (1) If A and B are subsets of C, then (by definition) all elements of A are elements of C, and all elements of B are elements of C. (A intersect B) is a subset of C, because neither A nor B contains an element which is not an element of C.

    (2) If A and B are subsets of C, then (by definition) all elements of A are elements of C, and all elements of B are elements of C. (A union B) is a subset of C, because neither A nor B contains an element which is not an element of C.

    However, (complement A) is the set of everything that is not A, including the United States Senate, thor, Sigma Draconis Beta, and any element of C which is not in A, plus any element of L which is not in C — that is, all languages which are not recursively enumerable. But an element of L which is not in C is an element of (complement C). Therefore, (complement A) contains at least one element which is in (complement C). Therefore we cannot know if an element of (complement A), that is, a given language that is not in A, is recursively enumerable (that is, is in C) or not (that is, in (complement C) without knowing more — specifically whether or not A is a proper subset of C. (If it is, some languages in (complement A) are in C, that is, are recursively enumerable, and some are not.)

    The above paragraph can be rewritten, substituting “B” for “A” wherever found.

    By (2) above, what is true for either B or A is true for (A union B). Therefore the above paragraph can be rewritten, substituting “(A union B)” for “A” wherever found. That is,

    (3) (complement (A union B)) is not a subset of C — it contains elements which are not in C (and therefore may be in (complement C)). A language which is not in (A union B) may be in C (that is, recursively enumerable) or it may not (that is, not recursively enumerable).

    So the three propositions are true, based simply on set theory. If the definitions give one or more of them not true, either the definitions are wrong or the boundaries of the sets are drawn wrongly (really two ways of saying the same thing).

    Admittedly it isn’t useful to you in Turing machine design :-) but you of all people should be happy to know the underlying math confirms your hypothesis!

    Regards,
    Ric

  404. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    By definition, the complement of C, C

    We’re not talking about the complement of the set of all recursively enumerable languages (at least, I wasn’t).

    We’re talking about the individual language (not a set of languages) which is the complement of one, specific recursively enumerable language. That language may, in fact, be recursively enumerable (specifically, if it is a member of the set of recursive languages), but it may not be.

    Sorry for the confusion.

  405. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    A language is a set of strings defined over some alphabet, which is a different thing from the set of languages.

  406. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Let L be the language {A}, that is the language which consists of the single character “A”. This language is recursively enumerable, because is possible (indeed, trivial) to construct a TM to recognize it.

    The complement of L is the set of all strings (not languages) which are anything other than the single character “A”.

    In this case L is recursively enumerable and its complement is also recursively enumerable, because the machine can be configured to reject anything other than that single character (multiple characters, or anything character other than A). Constructing a recognizer for the complement can be performed by simply inverting the output of the recognizer for the original language.

    In other cases, however, it may not be possible to construct a recognizer for the complement, because the definition of a recursively enumerable language allows for the machine to enter an infinite loop if its input string is not in the language, so simple inversion of the output won’t work (i.e., the problem is semi-decidable).

    If the machine always halts (whether in an accept or reject state), the language is recursive, which is a proper subset of recursively enumerable. It is precisely those languages within the set RE whose complements are also in RE.

  407. Ric Locke says:

    Ah. You are using the word “complement” to mean something more subtle than what it means in set theory, in which !A (I prefer the bang, as more prominent than the accent) is the set of all elements which are not in A. In particular, if the set of all strings is S, then !S is the set of everything which is not a string; you wish to make the implicit assumption that, if L is an arbitrary subset of S, !L = (!L * S) — that is, !L is also a string (or a set of strings). If it helps you, go ahead; it harms nothing, except that, as an unnecessary assumption, it encumbers the proof somewhat.

    Consider the arbitrary string B, which is a subset of !L (and, by the initial assumption, is also a subset of S). When presented to the machine, we get either a halt (after an arbitrary number of operations) or an infinite loop (containing an arbitrary number of operations). It seems to me that, under your definitions, this is how a “language” may be defined — if the TM stops, B is a language; if it does not, B is nonsense. (It has been ‘way too long since I did enough formal logic to prove it, but if the machine cannot be guaranteed to stop, it cannot be guaranteed to reach any predictable state, and if the machine does not reach a predictable state, the “statement” — the string of symbols presented to it — has no valid “meaning”.)

    If we adopt that standard, then C (in my previous analysis) is the subset of S containing all the strings which are valid languages. The rest follows.

    This is an attempt to apply something similar to the “anthropic principle”, to solve the halting problem by turning it inside out. I think it valid, though. A “language” is a set of symbols and the associated operations; a particular symbol causes the machine to perform a particular operation, complex or otherwise. I am suggesting that, in addition, to be considered a valid “language” (in this sense) the string must satisfy the requirements of the predicate calculus, that is, it will cause the machine to enter a defined state. “Halt” is a defined state. If the machine cannot be guaranteed to reach it, it cannot be guaranteed to reach any other defined state; the string of symbols does not satisfy the predicate calculus, and therefore cannot be classed as “language”; it is nonsense.

    Regards,
    Ric

  408. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Ah. You are using the word “complement” to mean something more subtle than what it means in set theory

    No, I’m using it in the standard way. We’re just talking about different sets. A language is a set of strings. The recursively enumerable languages are a set of languages, a set of sets.

    In particular, if the set of all strings is S, then !S is the set of everything which is not a string

    No, !S is the set containing the null element (generally called the “empty string”. Sets are defined on a universe, in this case the set of all strings. Apples, quasars, and Barack Obama are not included.

    It seems to me that, under your definitions, this is how a “language” may be defined — if the TM stops, B is a language

    Not quite. There’s a good definition here. A language which is accepted by a Turing machine is a specific kind of language, called a recursively enumerable language.

    There are languages which are not recursively enumerable, in particular the complement of a recursively enumerable language may not be recursively enumerable (which is where we came in).

  409. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    Universe in set theory (somehow the link didn’t come through in the previous post).

  410. Ric Locke says:

    Thanks, SBP — I learned something, always a good thing, and I have something more to think about, also a positive.

    Girl Genius has updated (I wish Prof. Foglio would get back to the main story; I predict romance between Briggs and Zeetha) and I have to work tomorrow. G’night all!

    Regards,
    Ric

  411. Spies, Brigands, and Pirates says:

    G’night, Ric. Always a pleasure to read your stuff.

  412. thor says:

    Comment by Ric Locke on 1/1 @ 9:00 pm #

    SBP, in a way I’m toying with you as badly as thor tries to. The way I put it isn’t useful to someone studying languages — but it’s correct, and if phrasing it in linguistics terms made it look as if it were not correct, the error would be in the phrasing. The underlying math is trivial.

    I already know that sPies’ question is flawed. Back when he first posted it I pulled my Math for Liberal Arts text out and did the union shit and then a few weeks later I showed it to a friend who basically said it can’t be answered as stated.

    sPies suffers from a lack a self-confidence and that’s what this whole exercise is about. Almost every post of his, sadly, centers around a I’m-better-than-you neurosis. Don’t know the medical name for that, but I’m sure there is one. All you can do is poke him until he short circuits.

    Chomsky, syntax, focus sPies. In Florida I have in my possession some rather old and hard to find papers of Chomsky, sPies, so you might not have much luck finding them at your library. Would you like to test your deep, deep understanding of his theoretical math? Remember, his is the “easy” stuff! Though you failed quite miserably at the really easy stuff so far.

    Maybe some pseudoscience involving linguistics from Zadeh?

    C’mon, sPies, those two dickheads are liberals, probably voted for Obama twice! You’re much smarter than either, it’s not like they watch Fox News!

  413. Ric Locke says:

    Careful making diagnoses, thor. You’re getting carried away by all that empty self-esteem being blown about.

    The theorem SBP stated is… not fundamental, but an important result in Information Theory, and the stuff I was needling him with is a standard sophomoric challenge to it. The exchange we indulged in has almost certainly been played out at least once a semester in every student bar near a university with a strong CS department since the CS department in question was founded, under whatever name, which is forty years in my personal experience and longer near, say, the river Charles. Your friend needs to take it up with Allan Turing (or, more probably, you didn’t understand it well enough to transmit the question in answerable form).

    In other words, you’ve been had by a geek in-joke. Enjoy.

    Regards,
    Ric

  414. thor says:

    The print function works quite well on my computer, so well let your aside rest. They guy I showed it too said he’d need to know more specifically this or that to respond to sPies proof so I figured it was a trick, but it was deemed to be flawed, regardless. If sPies has some background in set theory then good for him.

    I’d formed a curiosity in the abstracts and paradoxical lingua franca of Beckett and some other French authors. Then I saw Hippolyte’s Fuzzy Fiction and read it, and since I was thinking in a similar vein but more towards Zadeh’s original theories I decided to do a lengthy thesis paper on it, which sent me backwards into Chomsky, chaos theory and Godel in trying to figure out where to start. Very challenging for me since I hadn’t much math background from my undergrad days of algebra, calc and a little trig; I was a business major, as ya know. Anyway, that’s the extent of my interest, meaning next to none in sPies’ proofs or of his chest pounding.

    Before all this I-myself had known Chomsky more for his anarchist politics than anything else until I discovered the depth of his academic work. Interesting man, actually, and very honorable academic if one is forgiving of his politics.

    Peace.

    I really could care less outside of my knowing Chomsky’s work was broad enough only a fool would brag about mastering his “easy” stuff.

Comments are closed.