Towers of Onyx and Alabaster

Will get back to other stuff, but this NEEDS to be covered

2006-10-06T22:21:00Z

To those people who say "I believe in a conservative fiscal policy, and the modern Republicans have abandoned that", I must say: please pay close attention to what's actually happening.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/06/D8KJ8R2G1.html

The deficit is not just down, it's down better than expectations. The tax cuts have generated a HUGE increase in actual tax revenues taken in. Unemployment is virtually non existant. The Dow is hitting record highs. There is not a single compelling figure anywhere in the world of economics or finance that indicates our economy is anything other than nigh - golden age level.

The msm tries, they try mightily. For instance, I saw an article in the NYT the other day about rising home prices, but stagnant salaries, and how awful this was. What the article didn't address was 1) salaries in comparison to costs (i.e. with virtually zero inflation, salaries not going up is fine and dandy), 2) average earning per citizen (even if the same job isn't paying more, if people are able to constantly move to better paying jobs [they are], personal income can still go up [it has been]), 3) buying power compared to costs (tax cuts mean that even if your salary doesn't change, you still have more buying power) and, most importantly,

AN INCREASE IN THE PRICE OF HOMES MEANS THAT PEOPLE WHO ALREADY OWN HOMES (i.e. a majority of American households) ARE ACRUING REAL GAINS IN PROPERTY AND CAPITAL.

Homes are paid at a fixed rate. If the price of the housing market was going down, then yes, it would be easier for people to buy a new / first home... but it would mean that everyone who had ever bought a home (or other property) would be losing money.

In other words, even the "bad" news that the New York Times plastered on it's front page is actually GOOD news, just wrapped in deceitful and misleading terms.

sheesh.

~thy host~

New rules!

2006-10-05T19:04:56Z

I'm open to debates with anonymous folks.

However, if you're going to post, you have to demonstrate that you've actually read what I've said. If you're going to refute a point, you have to actually refute the source.

Sorry, d, you've lost debate privlages. Discounting sources with hand wavey gestures based on source publication and without proof, not bothering to read points before you rebutt them, etc. etc.. If you decide you're ready to grow up and debate like an adult, let me know. Until then, I'll be deleting your future posts as fast as you make them, and taking amusement in doing so.

Regarding the American Spectator article... I clearly stated that 90% of the content of the article was reprinted from a no longer available Washington Post article, and it was that reprinted material that was the substance of my argument. But apparently our friend couldn't be bothered to trouble himself with educating himself on the actual arguments he was trying to refute.

As the host, I reserve the right to knee jerk respond, particularly because if I make a mistake, I cop to it. (c.f. - misstating that Rangle wasn't up for relelection, when what I meant was he wasn't in a seriously contested election, not noticing you were agreeing with me that things are vastly better in Afghanistan in spite of the increased heroin production you brought up)

~your host~

These things are precious in life:

2006-10-04T23:10:16Z

* Being right, and those who doubted you being wrong.

From my anonymous debate partner, in the comments sections of the last two posts:
"4) The page's name is still not in the press. So much for the whole 'destroying his credibility'."

Except, ta da! Less than 12 hours after you made that post... It now is.
Just to be immature for a moment: ~told ya so~

* Other People completely reversing their positions, and saying they've ALWAYS had the new position, when you can prove they're either liars or fools.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/blog/printable.asp?ID=729
(this is about a Washington Post editorialist)

and last (for today), and related to the above but even more delicious:

* Blatantly contradicting YOURSELF in two different articles THE SAME DAY!
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=24741
(this is about a New York Times writer, and charges made in Woodward's new book)

Intellectual integrity, and self referential coherency, folks. Try them! They're fun!

On the Foley fiasco, continuing a theme

2006-10-03T16:05:12Z

More happy hypocrisy -

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20061002/bs_ibd_ibd/2006102issues01

Let it also be pointed out that Foley who yes, should have resigned... didn't actually DO anything physical... just creepy emails and IMs.

Studds actually had sex with the page, IN THE CAPITOL BUILDING.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Mixed Reactions, disingenuous perspectives

2006-09-25T16:31:01Z

From the Harvard Crimson, about the moderate Mr. Katami who just spoke there.

Anyone want to take bets on which groups were most supportive of his visit?

Hint: it wasn't the Christians or conservatives.

Further: Clinton's meltdown is just entertaining, and Pelosi and Rangle's comments about Chavez struck me as noteworthy and honorable... until Rangle's commented that Chavez deserved praise for making oil available for cheap to poor, and chided oil companies for not doing the same. Considering that this is only possible because Chavez nationalized and stole the refineries and pumping sites in Venezuela FROM those same companies over the last two years, it kind of takes away some of the virtue of the act, donchathink?

That, plus Rangle and Pelosi just so happen to NOT be up for re-election, and as such are immunized from their voter base against their comments. Anyone notice if any Dems that ARE up for re-election or campaigning for election made similar comments?

-your host

9/11

2006-09-17T01:53:51Z

I like to think that no one I know is STUPID enough, or so ensared in deranged fever swamp ravings as to actually believe the loose change non reality about 9/11

Just in case, and for posterity, I present an article by the editor of Popular Mechanics -
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/conspiracy_cranks_opedcolumnists_james_b__meigs.htm

Let's move on now, shall we?

this video is 30 seconds long

2006-09-11T22:28:01Z

but I would suggest that everyone give it a look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyrStaIoh-w

And yes, it is work safe, but it is not ideology safe.

On the nature of news, and the media

2006-08-10T18:45:53Z

The official death toll from the Qana hit has changed from around 50, to ~four~.

And their is indication that even those "kills" were staged.

While one might debate motivation, this demonstrates the sheer magnitude of the media fraud, propaganda, and outright lies being perpetrated by Hezballah in the Middle East right now, as does this piece of video, showing the staging and manufacturing of shots of "casualties" being "Rescued" was actually the same unfortunate body being loaded, removed, and reloaded into an abulance again and again.

In my previous post, an article for the BBC (practically an official propaganda wing of Hezballah at this point) was referenced, wherein claims were made that palestinians were rounded up by Israelies from their homes, and made to be human shields. The article offered no proof, no evidence, and no commentary from the Israeli military. Further, even if the grandiose claims were entirely accurate, the point is no one died or was even injured.

The world does not suck. The world is complicated, and there are bad people in it.

However, "moral equivalency" is a ludicrous trap, and cannot ever generate a result other than the propagation and continuation of the worst possible elements of any given society.

Recognize virtue, even if it is merely the least of several evils. Support that side. Promote its virtues, condemn its faults without losing sight of what makes it better than the alternatives. Be proactive, and deal with the fact that everything you've been taught (and I mean ACTUALLY taught, not just the illusionary reverse jingoism of Chomsky and the rest who insist that the whole of U.S. society is an orchestrated propaganda machine, which is utter nonsense on stilts) might be deliberately false, and based on ideology, not concrete reality.

-Me.

In other news, my company has an offer for a lot of money to make a swell game. This a Good Thing.

oh, last aside... August 22nd. Things will either get very, VERY bad on that day, or this will all soon calm down, and go back to another artifical "status quo" of random warcrimes against Israel while non jewish middle easterners are kept ignorant and powerless by their criminal, totalitarian leaders.

Unless, that is, we stand firm in Iraq, Israel wins, and we support any and all nascent movements towards liberty and actually internal change in that vast fever swamp.

Time will tell.

Qana, and "massacre"

2006-07-31T19:43:08Z

As Article 28 of the 4th Geneva Convention provides:

The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.

This is video of Hezbollah firing rockets from populated, civilian areas, among other fun activities.

"defending our constitutional liberties"

2006-07-10T23:09:30Z

"[they] are not defending our constitutional liberties when they betray the contract on which those liberties are based. This contract holds us to submitting our political differences to the due process of elections. Sabotage of the war effort – which is what the New York Times has been engaged in – is not criticism; it is sabotage. The violation of American security laws like the Espionage Act is just as much a declaration of war on our democracy as publishing information illegally provided, even if current law doesn’t cover such acts."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=23279

Golly Jeepers!

2006-06-28T19:20:59Z

So, it seems that the whole DeLay redistricting thing...

...was not only valid, but was found by an easy consensus of the Supreme Court to be a proper rebalancing of the voting districts that were explicitly broken by gerrymandering in 1991 by the Dems.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-204.pdf

And, for the record, this wasn't a "Bush appointees stole rigged the court" 5-4 split decision. Some of the key arguments were made by Justices Kennedy, Souter, and Ginsburg - not exactly right wing extremists Bush – o – philes.

And before anyone makes reference to the frankly sophomoric critique about the "weird" shapes of the congressional districts, the so called "snake district", etc., allow me to present you with a map of voting districts in....

California: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/pdf/congdist/pagecgd109_ca2.pdf
Pennsylvania: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/pdf/congdist/pagecgd109_pa3.pdf

and that raging hotbed of ultra conservatism, Massachusetts: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/pdf/congdist/pagecgd109_ma2.pdf
(EDIT: Whoopsie! reposted the PA link. Link now fixed.)

(and, for reference, the Texas map: http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/pdf/congdist/pagecgd109_tx2.pdf)

So, case done, justice served, DeLay vindicated and exonerated.

Looking forward to reporting on the upcoming incarceration of the editorial staff of the New York Times for treason and violation of various espionage acts,

Signing off for you,

your humble author.

Definitive.

2006-06-16T14:40:40Z

For anyone interested in a comprehensive review of the issues involved in the debate about the powers of freedom of the press, vs. the government's ability to retain secret information, this link leads to testimony originally delivered as prepared remarks to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on May 26, 2006.

It is rather comprehensive and quite unassailable.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110008511.

Coming Soon!

2006-06-14T14:31:55Z

So, I promise I will soon be writing an asia recap, and write about how all ~that~ went down.

In the mean time, more politically charged stuffs! posted today in the Canada Free Press, regarding Global Climate Change - http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm

Until soon...

Me

Regarding Haditha

2006-06-04T10:57:00Z

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/30/damon.iraq.btsc/

An unexpected offensive; results inconclusive

2006-06-02T01:59:36Z

Karoke and I are two things that really, REALLY, do not belong together.

Karoke, eleven shot glasses of scotch, and I is a war crime waiting to happen.

If the North invades the south in the next week or so, and claims "outrageous provocation, the detection of a weapon of such horror that it cannot be permitted to exist" as it's justifaction, and the south Korean government lets them in because it agrees, you'll know why.

On the other hand, I have a decent growl on Du Hast and Cowboys From Hell.

And no, I will never, ever, EVER, do that again.

Period.

Anyway.

Hope you all are doing well.

And thank God for Starbucks and Japaneese food.

That is all.

-Me

Day Three; Untapped Potential

2006-06-01T01:19:56Z

So, Korea's biggest challenge is pollution.

Particularly the "open sewage" smell that kind dominates street level.

Other than that, though, it's stunningly clean.

It's also very UN Hong Kong or Shanghai like in that it's (comparatively) well spread out, with six lane roads everywhere and traffic that is similar to what you might see in any US urban area - i.e. heavy, but not stupidly heavy.

My biggest issue, to be honest is the food.

It's essentially inedible.

This is a country that, fundamentally, despite being a bourgening first world micronation, is still dining on the same horrors to which they were forced to resort during their 5000 years of being essentially a peninsular vassal state to China (and yes, I know that occasionally Korea invaded and conquered large swaths of China... but come on.) with enemies in every cardinal direction.

There is no good reason to eat a chicken's foot, or to have fermented cabbage, drowned in enough chili pepper to kill the taste, as dietary staples.

These people drive BMWs and use cell phones that can calculate pi to completion and display entire movies.

They just need to realize they can actually step up to eating *just the good parts*, and they will reach a new period of ascended enlightenment.

In other news, the project goes kinda well, I've made my first powerpoint presentation, and a swell girl is in Austin waiting for me, and I'm not there.

Damnit.

bye for now.

Conquest of Asia, Day 2

2006-05-30T23:51:27Z

Or, really, the first full day here.

I'm on a shared computer at the hotel, in the lobby. fun.

I couldn't check my email yesterday, because the computer at the airport featured a lovely keyboard that DIDN'T HAVE AN UNDERSCORE ("_") character. Damnit.

Asian tv is weird. They have full nudity, but they blur out ~stuff~.

When the Korean who is leading you around the city says "the food at this restraunt is REALLY spicy", believe him. It was tasty, but.

Seoul is very, very clean compared to Hong Kong or anywhere in China.

It's still moderately scary.

Fascinated by how little chineese influence I'm seeing in the culture.

I have Starbucks, right now. This is a good thing.

It's not even 9 bloody am yet.

whee.

Might write more later.

ta!

Where the hell are the giant robots?

2006-05-30T07:48:29Z

So, Im in Osaka, Japan.

And.

There is not a single damn giant robot in sight.

No transforming robots.

No flying robots.

Not a single mecha, of any type, anywhere to be seen.

And dont even get me STARTED on the ninjas. Only one so far, and Ive been here a whole hour.

So far, bitterly dissapointed.

BTW, hi.

Going to Korea in an hour, be back home in two weeks.

And if Asia doesnt start coughing up the otaku goodness..... I might have to get nasty.

-Me

Party today

2006-03-04T20:44:54Z

BTW, I'm home

A party to celebrate Jamie's housewarming / welcome to Texas is today! To make me feel wanted, she's also telling me that it's a welcome home party, but we know what's an actual event to celebrate.

When:
Saturday Mar 04, 2006
at 8:00 PM (i.e. today!)

Where:
3619 B Leafield Drive
Austin, TX 78749

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=3619+B+Leafield+Drive,+Austin,+TX+78749

hope to see everyone there.

yeah yeah...

2006-02-16T18:02:03Z

I know, I suck.

No posts in ages and ages.

Just to clarify: this is not because I've spontaneously found a good time to be had in Paris.

Rather, it's because so little of interest happens that I deem appropriate for public consumption.

That, plus the introduction of skype to my world make communication lots easier, so I now do via direct chat what I had been doing via this.

Anyway.

I'M COMING HOME!

Thank God and any other divinities who may have had a part in seeing this little excursion through to a mostly successfull end.

Further, one of my ~best~ friends, the unmatchable Miss Maulie, is throwing me a party in Austin.

This is ~swell~.

I would like everyone to come.

you can get in touch with her via here: http://www.myspace.com/miss_maulie

It's March 4th, and she's doing the heavy lifiting / arangements on this.

Hope to see you all soon!

-Me

balseraph @ 2006-01-19T17:57:00

2006-01-19T16:57:18Z

Did I mention I was back in Paris?

Oh, yeah, I did. Cool.

Anyway, reading a lot about two movies I haven’t seen and don’t really expect to see… Brokeback Mountain, and Munich.

So, the best comment I’ve heard about Brokeback Mountain came from, of all places, a country western music station, as reported to me by my partents, who listen to such abominations.

The quote was “I don’t see why everyone is calling this a gay cowboy movie. Those guys are sheepherders, not cowboys. ‘A gay sheephearder’ movie, I guess, just sounded too redundant.”

In the interests of disclosure, I *liked* Ang Lee’s “Hulk”.

Moving on.

Munich is getting skewered by most of the right wing press (as in, the explicitly right wing press, as opposed to the left wing press usually referred to as ‘main stream media’) for too much balance, drawing moral equivalencies, and distorting history.

Among other complaints, the movie plays embarrassingly into some stereotypes (like Jews being money grubbing in the scene where the Mossad agents being told to keep receipts for expenses), and after extended soliliquies about “cycles of violence”, the movie ends in a powerful shot of…
…the twin towers that fell on 9/11, clearly implying that their destruction came because the aforementioned cycle wasn’t broken. To anyone remotely familiar with the history of the affair, this is a gross mischaracterization and injustice.

However.

The dissenters (on the right) point out some interesting things, the most important of these being that, while the movie humanizes the palestinian assassins, it never attempts to present a justification for the act. It shows scenes of the assassination throughout the movie, and never lets you forget why the events are taking place.

This humanization is important, as it is the hallmark of those whom we on the right struggle against (radical leftists, socialists, etc.) that their philosophies, when made manifest in the real world, invariably dehumanize the opposition, in gross opposition to (most of) their own stated values. (c.f. Marx, Stalinist Russia, etc.).

It is a burden incumbent on those who would be morally in the right to never forget the fundamental humanity of those they oppose.

But now, the ugly part: the fundamental humanity of those who would kill you, your friends, your families, or your people must be held as irrelevant (not denied), and sociopathic behavior of the sort must see the perpetrators met with explicit, unwavering, decisive, and merciless force, total retribution.

See, the point missed by the movie reviewers who credited the movie with humanizing the assassins of the Olympic athletes is this:

The movie didn’t bother to humanize the athletes, the people they killed.

Get a Grip Theater!

2006-01-10T11:26:26Z

Okay, so.

this was first made as a comment in someone else's journal, but as it hit a 7.8 on the snarky - O - meter, and said friend already has a valid reason to be pissed at me, I decided to delete it and repost it here.

BTW, I'm in France, I can't close my jaw due to TMJ (probably), I have two (2) people coming to visit me next weekend, and life is as complicated and busy as ever. Joy.

Oh, BTW, http://www.sacrosect.com/ I'm the suave looking fellow with the green shoulders on the right.

So, anyway, on to the political rant:

This begins here:

which has led to such assertions as "It is now illegal to annoy someone on the internet without disclosing your real name."

The comment I posted was this:

//********* begin

Welcome to "get a grip theater."

THIS is the content of the bill in question:

SEC. 113. PREVENTING CYBERSTALKING.
(a) In General- Paragraph (1) of section 223(h) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 223(h)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking `and' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
`(C) in the case of subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(1), includes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet (as such term is defined in section 1104 of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 note)).'.
(b) Rule of Construction- This section and the amendment made by this section may not be construed to affect the meaning given the term `telecommunications device' in section 223(h)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as in effect before the date of the enactment of this section.

see it for yourself at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:6:./temp/~c109TIA2AO:e91030:

And THIS is what it modifies:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode47/usc_sec_47_00000223----000-.html

Which was written in 1934, and contains the word "annoy".

GET A GRIP.

What the President signed was legislation extending the protections against harrasment by phone to cover harrasment by the internet.

That's it.

In total.

NOW.

We could get into a discussion about how the internet is a fundamentally different medium, etc. etc. However, this was ONE section out of 1199 that did not change existing law, it extended it to cover a new medium, passed the senate on a unanimous vote, and is yet another example of how the ACLU has transformed from the invaluable to the completely deranged.

We now return you to knee jerk reactionary theater.

//********* end

Thirty second followup: the word "annoy" in the original bill is probably a stupid word to have used, but there are 72 years of judicial precedents defining what is and is not an infraction of this law. It is a demonstrably good piece of policy making to, when discovering a new policy need, base new policy as closely on established and uncontrovercial existing policy as possible, so that existing judicial opinons retain maximal appicability, resulting in maximal clarity.

It is possible that the fundamental differences between the internet and phone communications makes this an unwise decision in this particular case, but there is nothing flagrantly stupid, evil, wrong, short sighted, evil, naive, or even improper about this.

This is, in fact, a demonstration of exactly how the process of government should function. There is every reason to believe that, whatever problems may arise from this piece of legislation, they will be minimal and restrained compared to what may have originated from any entirely new legislation, unrestrained by uncontrovercial judicial precedent.

-Me.

Things you never knew!

2005-12-28T21:45:15Z

Today I learned just how crucial one's upper lip is to effective use of a straw.

Fascinating!

Merry Christmas

2005-12-25T18:51:15Z

Merry Christmas!

Sorry haven't posted much, but hasn't been much to report. Some drama, some revelations, some important conversations have been had, and some are yet unrealized, but those are all things that are kind of only the business of the people involved, so.

::Grin::

As of yet, I have not beaten Skippy. Apparently, someone flung him / her self from the window of the club we both stop by, and as a result, it's closed. Or something. I didn't pay much attention, to be honest.

In town for another week or so, looking forward to New Years, which should be highly entertaining.

That's really it.

Ta!

Oh for Pete's sake!!

2005-12-16T23:57:32Z

...so.. who IS Pete, anyway?

So, there's this guy that goes / went by Skippy.

I haven't talked to him in over three years. His existence was brought to mind as I thought about other people in Pittsburgh I want to see.

I don't like him, and he and I have never gotten along.

However, contrary to the intent of my last post, which was SUPPOSED to be a stream of light hearted rant, he got word that I posted about causing problems.

And, apparently, someone has been screwing with him in some way. I'm not privy to details.

Whatever it is, it is not me, I have nothing to do with it, and, well, if I was ever pissed enough or invested enough in someone to want to cause them serious inconvenience or pain... I would do it to their face, and they would KNOW it was me, in NO uncertain terms. I'm not exactly the king of subtlety when it comes to confrontation.

Devious, yes. Subtle? Not so much.

I have way too much to do, and too many good times to be had to bother causing problems with him.

There is no problem.

End of story.

And for those that feel it's ridiculous to even think about this stuff after three years...

I don't hold grudges. Grudges are counterproductive. But there are people I care about to which he did bad things, and he never made ammends, never sought to fix his mistakes or make things right. And just because years have passed, doesn't mean that the hurt he gave good people about whom I care didn't happen.