Mostly from current headlines ... all of which make me wonder if there isn't a subspecies of humans that ought to be named Homo sapiens moronis.
Irving jailed for 3 years after denying Holocaust: So having a very controversial, politically unpopular opinion is enough for the thought police to put a person in jail? (I take it Austrian law doesn't rely on "proof of harm" as part of proving a case -- even for laws as stupid as theirs that criminalizes "denying the Holocaust".) I don't know whether to be glad or sad at this proof that the USSA doesn't have a lock on legislative and judicial idiocy.
Congressmen worry about ports deal with Dubai firm: Let me get this straight. It's perfectly acceptable for a UK firm to run six "major U.S. seaports" that include New York, Miami, and New Orleans. But a firm based in the United Arab Emirates is right out. Why? And the more I think about this, the more my reptilian brain spins ... Are these ports private property, or "public" property? If they're private, what business does the USSA Congress have butting in to the owners' business? If they're public, what group of dimwitted bulbs originally decided to sell such important interests in the frickin' first place?? [Methinks it's a different subset of the same bulbs now wanting to close the barn door after the horse done fled.] Again, if they're public property, I couldn't think of a better example of an antithetical "proof of concept".
And last, something which I understand a little better than the above:
This is a sample page from a book titled Why Mommy is a Democrat. The "about" page says that the book is nonjudgmental and promotes "tolerance" ... but wait, that same page also says the book has "numerous subtle (and not-so-subtle) satirical swipes at the Bush administration and the Republican party". Maybe the author's poor grasp of the English language is endemic to the party, and thus helps explain its current malaise.
And who's so wedded to a political party that he or she would seriously consider buying a book like this and reading it to his or her kids? Wait, don't answer that one; I know it. Those would be the same individuals who believe that the political process works effortlessly, like cream rising to the top of the milk. Wrong farm analogy, folks! It's sausage-making, and "we, the people" are the ones put through the grinder. (That forced "sharing" is one small part of the grinding process.) Personally, I find this book highly insulting to mothers. Thanks (I think) to frequent commenter Moni for pointing me to this web site.
No wonder I'm becoming more curmudgeonly each day ...
Moni(ka) says:
Sunni, I can't tell you how many times my child and myself have gotten in a muddy situation with other moms on the block for "not sharing". He gets the sulk from his friends because he doesn't share, or worse- gets hit. When I tell him he has the right to defend himself, either with words (which, let's face it, don't work so well in the world of 4-year-olds) or just hit back, I get the lecture. And Jerz frequently waves the right to hit back because he doesn't like hitting back his friends- which I think is a very good sign of trying to make his own decision about it.
Anyway, I could talk about this particular issue a LOT... :crazy:
Sunni says:
It's a regular challenge for us when the snolfs play with other children, too. I do plan on talking about childrearing issues more someday ... when I find the time. (Why does that line never fail to get laughs?)
John Newman says:
Sunni said:
No wonder I'm becoming more curmudgeonly each day ...
Personally, that's what I like about you.
jeffrey smith says:
"very controversial, politically unpopular opinion" is not what I would call Holocaust denial. And the Austrians did produce both Hitler and some of his most devoted assistants (may all their remembrances perish). So now of course they are extra tender on the subject.
No, it should not be a jailable offense. But let there be no sympathy for those who do morally odious things, whether they are in the seat of power or the victims of those who are in the seats of power.
Robert Noval says:
Insulting to mothers? How do you think us squirrels feel?
But semi-seriously, I'm convinced there's a reason for the recent inanities in the news:
http://www.smallgov.org/?p=196
Not just any fish will do.
Meanwhile, the libertarians that are for sale seem to have found a buyer for the L.P.'s pathetic i.e.s.:
http://libertyforsale.com/2006/02/21/watching-the-democrats-plan/#comment-5620
In re. jeffrey smith comment:
Unfettered freedom of speech is essential as warden to establishment of facts. Once you criminalize the mere expression of an opinion, regardless of how discredited or unpleasant, you establish the possiblity of government spreading false information, and criminalizing it's refutation.
---The Bikemessenger
Sunni says:
So John, you mean you're not here for my optimism?
Jeffrey, my comments aren't an endorsement of Holocaust denial. I've been to Dachau and think that deniers have serious issues with reality. That said, given the propensity to exaggerate and propagandize, it wouldn't surprise me if some estimates of the Holocaust's victims are inflated. And that brings me to my final word on the subject: there's no way to get an accurate statistic now, so quibbling over numbers seems to entirely miss the point, which in my view is that something so horrific could happen at all, whether to 30 or 3 million.
Hi Robert, and welcome! Yes, of course I was concerned for the squirrels as well, but I'm not yet nuts enough to feel deep kinship with them. I do believe that wagging the dog is now a fulltime fedgov activity, and am surprised that, after the movie, more Amerikans don't recognize it.
Laura says:
AAA Q alert. I would be interested in exploring some practical applications of freedom as they relate to childrearing. I know Sunni said she'd do this at some point in the future, but I thought maybe by asking a question, other conspirators could put two cents in too, thus getting more of this interesting topic on the table sooner rather than later. I enjoyed Jorge's post a while back about food and children - and Sunni's about her daughter's "messy" tendencies. Monika's and Sunni's comments re sharing perked my ears up via the subject of "discipline" (using the term very loosely - as I personally don't do much of it, at least not in the typical way). (Interesting side note to Monika's comments re hitting: I recently caught a bit of a TV special "Raising Cain" and in it were several video clips from Japanese preschools where teachers do not intervene when kids hit each other, or yank toys away from each other, or whatever, and in every case shown, the kids successfully resolved matters on their own, and of course had much more ownership of a solution which wasn't forced on them. And these were little kids, not even that verbal yet - like 2-4.)
My question I guess is what are some of the primary things that you conspirators do as parents that you see as starkly contrasting (and therefore a very good thing) with the mainstream? (I know about unschooling; I'm looking more for a discussion on ways that you interact (or don't) with your kids on day-to-day things.
Sunni says:
Hey, Laura, thanks for the question -- and for the polite reminder about AAA time. I'm swamped at the moment, but will address some of your questions soon; perhaps over the weekend.
jeffrey smith says:
found this bit of background about Dubai World Ports in one of the local alternative weeklies.
The interesting stuff begins with paragraph 7.
http://www.miamisunpost.com/murmur.htm