Dragon scale armor for modern troops. I kid you not. From Defense Review.
4 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Other
Archive for October, 2008
Didn’t Julian of Amber wear armor like this
Posted October 23, 2008 By John C WrightInteresting Statistic on Charitable giving
Posted October 22, 2008 By John C WrightLet me I pass along to you a statistic reported in the Jewish World Review:
Liberal families earn about 6 percent more than conservative families, yet conservative households donate about 30 percent more to charity than do liberal households. And conservatives give more than just to their own churches and other houses of worship. Conservatives, especially religious conservatives, give far more money and donate more of their time to nonreligious charitable causes than do liberals — especially secular liberals.
Interesting, because it defies the common opinion that conservatives are rich and progressives are poor.
The article goes on:
In 2007, President George W. Bush and his wife had an adjusted gross income of $923,807. They paid $221,635 in taxes, and donated $165,660 to charity ? or 18 percent of their income. Vice President and Mrs. Cheney, in 2007, had a taxable income of $3.04 million. And they paid $602,651 in taxes, and donated $166,547 to charity ? or 5.5 percent of their income.
Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, earned between $200,000 and $300,000 a year between 2000 and 2004, and they donated less than 1 percent to charity. When their income soared to $4.2 million in 2007, their charitable contributions went up to 5 percent.
Joe and Jill Biden, by contrast, made $319,853 and gave $995 to charity in 2007, or 0.3 percent of their income. And that was during the year Biden was running for president. Over the past 10 years, the Bidens earned $2,450,042 and gave $3,690 to charity — or 0.1 percent of their income.
The article also says that the delegates to the DNC wish to raise taxes on the rich, but when asked, named figures less than the rich currently pay.
A U.S. News & World Report blogger went to the Democratic National Convention in Denver and conducted an informal poll of 24 DNC delegates. He asked them, "What should ‘the rich’ pay in income taxes?" Half the respondents said "25 percent"; 25 percent said "20 percent"; 12 percent said "30 percent"; and another 12 percent said "35 percent." The average DNC delegate wanted the rich to pay 25.6 percent, which is lower than what the rich pay now.
In other words, taxes have ALREADY been raised on the rich, and have been raised for years, and the Democrat party members seem not to have noticed.
In other words, taxes have ALREADY been raised on the rich, and have been raised for years, and the Democrat party members seem not to have noticed.
* * *
P.S. The man writing the article. Mr. Larry Elder, is a gentleman of color, so if you disagree with his conclusions or have an issue with his ideas, you are a racist. There! That will silence all nonconformity!
I believe there is an article appearing in the Kansas City Star which explains the logic: any disagreement with a black man is a code word for racism. I note with approval the universal condemnation that pours from the comments box, unremittingly calling the author, a Mr. Diuguid, to task for the breathtakingly foolish assertions.
Filed in Other
Probable, Possible, Free Will
Posted October 21, 2008 By John C WrightI thought this topic deserved its own thread, since we are now swimming in very deep philosophical waters.
A reader writes in and says: " I would point out that probability is reduced as knowledge is increased."
My reply: That depends on ontological status of what we call ‘probability’.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Other
Stoicism
Posted October 21, 2008 By John C WrightFor those of you unfamiliar with the dignified and harsh doctrine of the Stoics, here is an excerpt from the ENCHIRIDION of Epictetus. I also recommend the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. Epictetus was a manumitted slave; Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. Both employed philosophy in its correct use, not in mere verbal disputes about metaphysics, but to learn the consolation of how best to live in adversity and pain.
1 Of things, some are in our power, and others are not in our power. In our power are thought, impulse, will to get and will to avoid, and, in a word, everything which is our own doing. Things not in our power include the body, property, reputation, office, and, in a word, everything which is not our own doing. Things in our power are by nature free, unhindered, untrammeled; things not in our power are weak, servile, subject to hindrance, dependent on others. Remember then that if you imagine that what is naturally slavish is free, and what is naturally another’s is your own, you will be hampered, you will mourn, you will be put to confusion, you will blame gods and men; but if you think that only your own belongs to you, and that what is another’s is indeed another’s, no one will ever put compulsion on you, no one will hinder you, you will blame none, you will accuse none, you will do nothing against your will, no one will harm you, you will have no enemy, for no harm can touch you.
2 Aiming then at these high matters, you must remember that to attain them requires more than ordinary effort; you will have to give up some things entirely, and put off others for the moment. And, if you would also have office and wealth, it may be that you will fail to get them, just because your desire is set on higher matters, and you will certainly fail to attain those things which alone bring freedom and happiness.
3 Make it your study then to confront every harsh impression with the words, “You are but an impression, and not at all what you seem to be.” Then test it by those rules that you possess; and first by this—the chief test of all—“Is it concerned with what is in our power or with what is not in our power?” And if it is concerned withwhat is not in our power, be ready with the answer that it is nothing to you.
4 Remember that the will-to-get promises attainment of what you will, and the will-to-avoid promises escape from what you avoid; and he who fails to get what he wills is unfortunate, and he who does not escape what he wills to avoid is miserable. If then you try to avoid only what is unnatural in the region within your control, you will escape from all that you avoid; but if you try to avoid disease or death or poverty you will be miserable.
Therefore let your will-to-avoid have no concern with what is not in man’s power; direct it only to things in man’s power that are contrary to nature. But for the moment you must utterly remove the will-to-get; for if you will to get something not in man’s power you are bound to be unfortunate; while none of the things in man’s power that you could honorably will to get is yet within your reach. Impulse to act and not to act, these are your concern; yet exercise them gently and without strain, and provisionally.
5 When anything, from the meanest thing upwards, is attractive or serviceable or an object of affection, remember always to say to yourself, “What is its nature?” If you are fond of a jug, say you are fond of a jug; then you will not be disturbed if it be broken. If you kiss your child or your wife, say to yourself that you are kissing a human being, for then if death strikes it you will not be disturbed.
6 What disturbs men’s minds is not events but their judgments on events. For instance, death is nothing dreadful, or else Socrates would have thought it so. No, the only dreadful thing about it is men’s judgment that it is dreadful. And so when we are hindered, or disturbed, or distressed, let us never lay the blame on others, but on ourselves, that is, on our own judgments. To accuse others for one’s own misfortunes is a sign of want of education; to accuse oneself shows that one’s education has begun; to accuse neither oneself nor others shows that one’s education is complete.
7 Be not elated at an excellence which is not your own. If the horse in his pride were to say, “I am handsome,” we could bear with it. But when you say with pride, “I have a handsome horse,” know that the good horse is the ground of your pride. You ask then what you can call your own. The answer is—the way you deal with your impressions. Therefore when you deal with your impressions in accord with nature, then you may be proud indeed, for your pride will be in a good which is your own.
8 Ask not that events should happen as you will, but let your will be that events should happen as they do, and you shall have peace.
Filed in Other
Oh, those Wacky Stoics and Platonists!
Posted October 20, 2008 By John C WrightI was reading Cicero’s De Natura Deorum, when I came across a passage that reminded me to put my disputes with others into perspective.
In this scene, Velleius the Epicurean is criticizing the speculations of Balbus the Platonist and Lucilius, who represents the Stoics. He asks them if the Demiurge of Plato made the world, or the Providence of the Stoics, why these deities delayed so long? What occupied them for the infinity of time before the world was framed?
“Moreover I would put to both of you the question, why did these deities suddenly awake into activity as world-builders after countless ages of slumber? …. it is inconceivable that there was ever a time when time did not exist. Well then, Balbus, what I ask is, why did your Providence remain idle all through that extent of time of which you speak? Was it in order to avoid fatigue?
“But god cannot know fatigue; and also there was no fatigue in question, since all the elements, sky, fire, earth and sea, were obedient to the divine will. Also, why should god take a fancy to decorate the firmament with figures and illuminations, like an aedile? If it was to embellish his own abode, then it seems that he had previously been dwelling for an infinite time in a dark and gloomy hovel!
“And are we to suppose that thenceforward the varied beauties which we see adorning earth and sky have afforded him pleasure? How can a god take pleasure in things this sort? And if he did, he could not have dispensed with it so long.”
Filed in Other
Ah, the Joys of Parenting
Posted October 18, 2008 By John C Wright
The song is Shanghai Lil, from the move Footlight Parade (James Cagney and Ruby Keeler, 1933).
I was watching this with my ten year old son, who simply did not understand what was going on, so I had to explain to him the age-old relationship between lonely sailors and prostitutes.
You see, his immersion into the Pokemon culture has not prepared my son to understand the references to what is going on here.
Some questions were easy to answer. What does “on the level” mean? What is a “Dame”? What is a Chateau? Why is that guy offering her a house?
Other questions verged into grown-up topics. Why is Shanghai Lil detrimental to the industry of, er, let us call them the ladies of the evening? Why does sailor Bill get angry and clobber the Joe who roars that Lil is “everybody’s gal”?
I also had the dubious pleasure of explaining what an opium den is, or what opium is, for that matter.
My sons knows, in an abstract way, what adultery is, because he knows his ten commandments. So I told him Shanghai Lil and the various harlots in the film were ladies who committed adultery for money.
Well, it gave me a new appreciation for the Hayes Code.
I also, with considerably less embarrassment, described the difference between Marines and Sailors, and told him that there was no better and more disciplined fighting force in the history of the world than the marines. Semper Fi! (Despite that, I told him as a Navy family, we had to root for the sailors. Go Navy!)
Seeing a Hollywood movie display the American flag and display the face of the President is also something my son would not see in a modern film.
(Even though, when asked to name the president here, he guessed Washington.)
Filed in Other
Servants of Moloch
Posted October 17, 2008 By John C WrightThis is from the testimony of Jill Stanek, before the the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee, who were debating a bill to protect the life of babies born alive after a failed attempt at abortion.
One night, a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down’s syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have time to hold him. I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was 21 to 22 weeks old, weighed about ½ pound, and was about 10 inches long. He was too weak to move very much, expending any energy he had trying to breathe. Toward the end, he was so quiet that I couldn’t tell if he was still alive unless I held him up to the light to see if his heart was still beating through his chest wall. After he was pronounced dead, we folded his little arms across his chest, wrapped him in a tiny shroud, and carried him to the hospital morgue where all of our dead patients are taken.
When she made public the fact that in Christ Hospital left babies who survived abortion — viable babies whose delivery was induced, and whom the abortionist intended to kill but somehow survived — we left alone in a utility room to die, it was discovered that no current law prevented the practice. New legislation was introduced to close the loopholes which allowed this infanticide. The Judiciary Committee was the then state Senator Barak Omaba, who argued and voted against the bill, saying that if the child "was not meant to live" it should not be kept alive.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Other
Famous Nonexistant Space Wars
Posted October 17, 2008 By John C WrightEnough about politics! More about science fiction!
OK, readers: the Lensmen of Civilization have finally located the source of the addictive hallucinogenic messiah-creating geriatric drug known as ‘spice’. No, it is not planet Trenco, as was first thought, but the waterless desert planet Arrakis. The only problem is that it is defended by the Bene Gesserit Witches, the Sardukar Terror-Troops, the Spacer’s Guild and the CHOAM corporation, not to mention the other great houses of the Landsraad. The Lensmen have vowed to wipe out these Zwilnicks. Who wins?
For extra credit, Bene Gesserit Witches are hunting down R2D2 and C3PO, because the rules of the Butlerian Jihad demands that no machine made in the image of the human mind shall be suffered to live. Is it morally permissible for the comedy relief sidekick robots to wake up or rebuild Ultron?
Filed in Other
Joe the Plumber Derangement Syndrome,
Posted October 17, 2008 By John C WrightIt seems a man named Joe from Ohio, a plumber, standing in a rope line at an Obama event, asked the candidate a question about taxes. This , as best I can tell, was the exchange:
JOE WURZELBACHER: “I’m a plumber. You know, I work, you know, 10, 12 hours a day. If I buy another truck and add something else to it, and you know, build the company…” OBAMA: “Right.” WURZELBACHER: “… you know, I’m getting taxed more and more.” OBAMA: “Nobody likes high taxes.” WURZELBACHER: “No, not at all.” OBAMA: “Right? Of course not. So — but what’s happened is, is that we end up — we’ve cut taxes a lot for folks like me who make a lot more than $250,000. We haven’t given a break to folks who make less. It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance at success, too. And everybody is so pinched that business is bad for everybody. And I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
Joe the Plumber was then used as an example in the final debate between Obama and McCain. The Media, who has yet to ask, let us say, William Ayers pinko terrorist about his links to Obama, found the time to camp out on Joe’s doorstep.
Here is an article on the matter, from The New Editor
Filed in Other
Protected: How to Survive an Alien Attack
Posted October 16, 2008 By John C Wright Filed in Other
From the Pen of David Morgan
Posted October 16, 2008 By John C WrightMorgan’s Third Law of Writing:
The reasons for seemingly illogical behaviour should at least be hinted at in fiction, rather than relying on the audience to make post-hoc excuses for the writers.
Nicely said. From the Darths & Droids webcomic.
UPDATE: My wife reminds me that she has her own law of writing:
Mrs. Wright’s Second Law of Writing: The Reasonable Roleplayer Rule.
No character should adopt any plan if an average D&D player-character would have thought of cleverer one (such as taking along a super-soaker filled with Holy Water your interview with a vampire, or agreeing to a handshake rule with all party members when your enemy is Dr. Mirage the Illusionist).
Filed in Other
From the Pen of Scott Ott
Posted October 16, 2008 By John C WrightMcCain to Unveil Radical Economic Plan at Debate
by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace
(2008-10-14) — Sen. John McCain, sagging in the polls due to recent mixed messages that failed to connect with undecided journalists, will allegedly use his final presidential debate with rival Barack Obama to unveil a new, and radical economic plan.
Outlines of the proposal leaked to the news media paint a picture of an imaginary economy driven by the so-called ‘profit motive’ and tempered by a ‘risk-reward’ scheme that “automatically benefits the bold-yet-prudent, and punishes the foolish and wasteful,” according to a draft document.
Immediately branded by Congressional Democrats and Republicans alike as “impractical and frankly just wacky,” the McCain plan calls for a near-total government withdrawal from the private business sector, “because elected officials and their appointed bureaucrats operate outside of the arena of risk-reward, therefore their intervention can serve only to foul the engine of prosperity — discouraging investment by the wise, while cushioning falls for fools.”
Mr. McCain reportedly theorizes that his concept would not only offer the best prospect of long-term growth and innovation, but also would provide the most effective motive for altruism because “the merchant or laborer who does good for others, does well for himself.”
“It’s my hunch,” Sen. McCain will reportedly say, “that if we would actually try this economic plan, not only would it offer more freedom for the individual, but Congress could reduce income and corporate tax rates and yet the Treasury would still realize higher, and steadily-growing, revenues.”
“As I envision it,” the Arizona Republican will say, “the whole system, anchored in a realistic understanding of human nature, would harness each person’s self-interest to generate results that tend to the common good, producing what some would call unintended benevolence, and conferring what would appear to be accidental dignity, to even the least educated among us who applies himself to industrious work.”
Sen. McCain’s plan reserves to government almost nothing but the role of “making laws that forbid dishonest or oppressive behavior, and then enforcing those laws without prejudice.”
Sen. Barack Obama, whose economic plan offers tax breaks to non-taxpayers and sharply higher taxes to those who generate profits, issued a terse response to the purported McCain proposal: “LOL”
Filed in Other
Theft
Posted October 15, 2008 By John C WrightFrom International Herald Tribune:
The chief executives of the nine largest banks in the United States trooped into a gilded conference room at the Treasury Department at 3 p.m. Monday. To their astonishment, each was handed a one-page document that said they agreed to sell shares to the government. Then Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. said they had to sign it before leaving.
The chairman of Wells Fargo, Richard Kovacevich, protested strongly that, unlike his New York rivals, his bank was not in trouble because of investments in exotic mortgages and did not need a bailout.
But by 6:30, all nine chief executives had signed.
Make no mistake: this act is not only unconstitutional, it does not even have a color of law. No law passed by Congress can give the Federal Government the right to force sales or extort property, because the constitution specifically prohibits such impairment of contracts. Article 1, section 10, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution says: “No State shall . . . pass any . . . ex post facto Law or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts.” Neither can this possibly be excused as eminent domain, or any other public interest motive. It is merely theft.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Other
British Comedians Explain Subprime Banking Mess
Posted October 14, 2008 By John C Wright
This is from over a year ago. British comedians saw it coming.
Filed in Other
