Criminally Reckless and Careless, But Not Terrorism

17 04 2018


Norm wrote this here back in December, at the time when I was starting in on being debilitated for two weeks because of the flu.

While he’s facing charges, it does not appear that there is any evidence that this was a Truck of Peace.


But That Was Three Current Years Ago

17 04 2018


Starbucks, in the halcyon days, before it started throwing out moochers and trespassers brutalizing black bodies.

I though we weren’t allowed to hide behind the “but some of my best friends are black” lie line anymore.

Thoughts for the Morning

17 04 2018

Your Blogmeister’s Secret Hideout

Most of my self-inflicted problems in life have been a direct result of me not paying attention to my own gut instincts.

Many problems would disappear if everyone who could possibly do so could tell the difference between correlation and causation.


16 04 2018

Washington, D.C.

“T*******m” in modern accepted current usage is a mild pejorative.  So if we do like ole Dylan here wants, and prohibit the word “t*******m” for the sake of PC, the word to describe the concept that becomes permissible might not be or sound harsh enough to make the concept of t*******m a pejorative.  At such a time, the concept we now call t*******m will gain acceptance.

However, I think I’m being too clever by half.  I think the real problem ole Dylan has with the word “t***e” has to do with that other t***e that is sometimes called a t***e, uncomfortably so to them.

Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, either way.

NEWSFLASH: Men Fight, Die Over Resources, Territory

16 04 2018

Bishopville, South Carolina

Because it’s the first time in the history of human civilization where that has happened.

The only way this story would be at least a little interesting is if we find out one of the gangs made up a rumor that the other one was stockpiling WMDs.

Monday Pains After the Saturday Workout

16 04 2018

Your Blogmeister’s Secret Hideout

I asked on Saturday, yet not many of you were in the philosophically conversationalist mood.

So I’ll pay it off now, but in this a separate post, instead of just a long comment on Saturday’s post, because I think I’m about to unload some profound brilliance on your heads.

I’ll ask the same question in a slightly different way:

Let us suppose there is a book, that (1) Everyone owns, (2) The version everyone owns is carved in diamond, meaning it is physically indestructible, and (3) Everyone has read it.  How would it be possible to burn such a book for the sake of censorship?  Because it would still be possible even with all three of these conditions.

I’m about to open my toolbox of hints.


When I first learned of the dystopian genre of relatively modern literature, I of course read 1984 and Brave New World, back to back.  While most people think that 1984 is a more tedious read than BNW, I sorta thought the opposite, that 1984 was a more fun read than BNW, even though I understood where those who thought 1984 was more “tedious” than BNW were coming from.  However, what I understood after getting through both was that there was just something about BNW that made more sense than 1984.

After that, I didn’t give it really any thought.

Until several years ago, when I encountered this illustration of a paragraph from a 1985 book, author and title are cited at the bottom of the illustration.  That gave rhyme and reason to my initial bias toward BNW over 1984.  Huxley just had a better read on human nature than Orwell did.  At that point, I re-read BNW and then kinda skimmed 1984, and all the pieces fell into place.  At that point, BNW became more of a fun read, because I knew this the second time around what I was supposed to be looking for.

This the first hint actually has the least relevance to the answer to my question, but it’s worth throwing out there anyway.


My post of about two weeks ago where I analyze the ExploreMOhealth zip code database.

In it, you will read my frustration upon figuring out that data are only as good as the biases of the official people who have the official duty of officially interpreting them.  Nobody from on high is censoring this data — In fact, it’s freely available on a public website, and I’m sure no internet filters compiled by the Pro-Defamation League are blocking this website and the data.  Instead, we get a situation where all the official officials peddle the notion that zip codes have magic dirt and tragic dirt.

That led me to write a fresh new axiom for my list, see #71.


Stay on my axioms post, and scroll up a little bit to #68:

If Stalin was an early 21st century American instead of a mid-20th century Soviet, he would say that what matters to him isn’t who casts the votes or who counts the votes, but who interprets the results.

The real Stalin said that it didn’t matter to him who casts the votes, but it mattered to him who counted the votes.  I took his bon mot one step further, making it plain that the real power in today’s society is interpreting the results, namely, the official officials who are given the official power to make official interpretations for the political class.  If you can control that class of people, largely TV talking heads, media hacks and non-profit foundation and think tank paper pushers and spreadsheet junkies, then you have the inside track to controlling American politics.  More than that, I think this kind of thing actually has been going on for a long time.  Largely at the behest of and for the benefit of Jews, corporatists and plutocrats.  Meaning there really isn’t that much voter fraud — Because there doesn’t have to be.  The official election interpretation class is where the public’s expressed will for the desire of populism and nationalism through the democratic republican process is officially snuffed out and contorted.


I lost the URL, so you’ll have to take my word for it.  But, some time earlier this month, it was either Matthew Yglesias, or one of the big name writers at Vox, wrote an article proclaiming that he actually got around actually to reading The Bell Curve, and then went on to analyze it for what everyone else who has read it knows it is not, that is, a polemic fundamentally about racial differences in intelligence.  The fool read the whole thing, (so he says), and still walked away from it not understanding what it was plainly about.


A fundamental precept of communication is that the intent of the messenger and the interpretation of the recipient are often different.  Ten different people can read a plain language sentence, and there can still be ten wildly different interpretations of it.


Do you see where this is going?  You should probably have a good line on the answer to my question by now.

The way to burn an unburnable book that everyone has read is to control the official societal mechanisms of interpreting that book.  This way, nobody will walk away from the book with the author’s intended interpretation, and everyone will wind up interpreting it in the way that those who control the official societal mechanisms of interpretation want us to have.  The message has been censored, but with no literal physical censorship necessary.

One of the points I make often in my life’s great unfinished dissertation on powerology is that, when given the choice between the two, the potential despot should choose quiet discrete non-obvious ways to exercise power rather than showy loud obvious ways.  You the despot get what you want in terms of policy enactment, but none of the blowback that comes from it being obvious to everyone what you’re doing.  Better yet, best that next to nobody understands the despotic level of power you have — You know how that goes, uneasy lies the head.  Baraq Obama was a master at that technique, obfuscating his policies in such a way where he harvested the positive consequences (if any) but never got blamed for the negative consequences (of which there were many), usually finding a way to channel and offload public blame on others.

Netting it out:

The Jews don’t need to censor any books, because they have a pretty solid control over the official mechanisms of interpretation.

With that, I can already see the face palms of incredulity coming from Queens and East Tennessee and Portland, Oregon, and maybe other places.  I know you all are screaming “POST HOC” and “A POSTERIORI” at your screens right now.  Yeah, maybe this brilliant profundity of mine does suffer these problems.  But I also think those problems don’t preclude its general accuracy.

The Edujunket Gap

16 04 2018

Washington, D.C.

Okay, I can grok the theory that background knowledge has a dynamic relationship with basic literacy.

But I can’t be made to believe that the fundamental driver behind TEH GAP is that rich (“white”) parents can afford to send their little crumb crunchers off to educational junkets and sabbaticals to Europe every summer, while lower income (“black”) parents cannot.

I mean, does the Mother Continent have some sort of magic dirt when it comes to elementary education and pedagogy?