How true

i love simplicity, especially when it produces something solid and irrefutable:

You cannot use logic to talk someone out of a position they did not use logic to adopt. 

Your Mind Can Be Fooled - Mine Was

Well, this is probably the laziest blog entry ever, since it's just a link. But what a link. Watch this video start to finish (it's about four minutes) and you'll quickly realize that whether you are a republican, democrat, rich, poor, christian, jewish, muslim, black, white, man, woman, etc. that your mind can be easily tricked.

Think of this video as you form opinions regarding the upcoming election and politics in general

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f29kF1vZ62o&feature=related

The Penn State Sex Scandal: how do you know what you know, pt 89

You know the story.  Penn State University is mired in a scandal where an assistant coach allegedly used  university facilities to sexually abuse young boys. When this was reported to those in charge, they didn't report it to the police and now the proverbial stuff has hit the proverbial fan.  And everybody has an opinion, including the alleged perpetrator Jerry Sandusky, who recently made statements to the press saying he never did any of the stuff he's accused of.

So now it's in the news and everybody's 'taking a stand'. Trouble is, those stands are based on a lot of innuendo, hearsay, partial stories reported in a biased or half assed manner, etc.  This is typical of Americans: grab a  handful of facts from your favorite source - left, right, doesn't matter - draw a conclusion and then argue the point vehemently with anyone who disagrees.

This is like two twelve year olds debating the validity of string theory: neither one of them understands what they are actually discussing, they are just disagreeing based on their take on 'the facts'.

Proof of my point ladies and gentleman - the actual grand jury report related to the Penn State scandal. You can view it here: http://www.freep.com/assets/freep/pdf/C4181508116.PDF

It's available because it's a public record. It was conducted according to the laws of the state which means people who are NOT reporters, columnists, opinion makers and social critics did NOT write it. It's just a bunch of information gathered by people who talked to everyone involved. There's no motivation to sell it, make money from it, base your campaign for governor/president/dog catcher on it. It's just a report.

And i bet you didn't read it.  If you had, you would have all the facts, not just the ones your favorite media mouthpiece wants you to have.  Mostly it's boring. But the parts that are not are graphic and sickening.

It's really a shame that 'news' sources are required to print this thing in its entirety. It's also a shame that people who consider themselves intelligent didn't do the obvious thing - google it and go find it like i did.

Now just imagine how many self appointed know-it-alls are out there shooting off their mouths with just fragments of information taken from one source.  "Big thinkers" talking about 'what oughta be done' about immigration/gun control/poverty/jobs/exploring space/giving vaccines to kids, etc while none of them has read anything in depth on any of these subjects.

So the next time you open your mouth to preach - or stand up to applaud your favorite commentator - ask yourself this: how do i "know" what i "know?" and how does that commentator/source "know" what he/she/it "knows?"

Mocking the homeless - i have a house and you don't, ha ha ha hah ha

Usually, this type of thing will spur me to climb my soapbox and rant for days. But i was both furious and honestly shocked by this incident - to the point where i am speechless.  How any group of people could think this was funny is beyond me.  And pointing it out to them is useless. If you have to be told this sort of thing is wrong, it's too late.....you're soul is dead.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/313691

Jerry Doyle, conservatives and what's really wrong with America

This is a short post.

Jerry Doyle is a right wing talk show host who wrote a book called "Have You Seen My Country Lately?: America's Wake-Up Call."

The problem with the conservative right in America is contained in the title. "Have You Seen MY Country Lately?"  Not our country. MY country. Got it? Jerry's country. Jerry's America.  The right's America.

This has been the same drum the right has been beating since Reagan got into the white house: some of us are "true Americans" who "get it" and we're being pushed aside by godless liberals who want to give away the country and sell our values down the river.  Us vs. them. Take back the country. The "moral majority."  It's a war, a battle, a fight, a brawl, grab that flag and take hold of it before those horrible liberals destroy everything wonderful about America.

No Jerry, it's not YOUR country. It's not the conservative right's country. It's not the Tea Party's country. It's OUR country.  That means you live here and I live here and we disagree and that's just too bad because that, my friend, is what America is all about.

Doyle, is it? I'm an O'Meara. It always stuns me when Irish-Americans, whose ancestors were mercilessly shit on by the British for centuries turn into intolerant blowhards. 

Obliterating bad information pt.1: schizophrenia and insanity

Note: this is part of an ongoing series in which commonly held beliefs are shown to be wrong and corrected).


Schizophrenia does not mean "split personality."  Somehow that idea crept into the public consciousness and pops up regularly in dinner party conversation, sitcoms, cartoons, movies, etc. It's incorrect, so get it out of your head right now.

The word 'schizophrenia' was coined by a Swiss doctor named Eugen Bleuler sometime in the late 19th or early 20th century.  It is applied to one of the best known forms of mental illness, a diagnosis that is best known in the public mind as crazy, bonkers, insane, wack-o, etc. If someone hears the voice of God telling them to burn down their house with their family in it or decides that wearing a tin foil hat will prevent the CIA & KGB from reading their thoughts, we're probably talking about schizophrenia.  Though not necessarily. Because in medicine we start with symptoms. What are the patient's symptoms? If they symptoms are the scenarios i described above, those are symptoms of what we call psychosis. The person is exhibiting psychotic thinking.  So the next question is, why is he/she psychotic? Side effect of some medication? Drugs? Brain damage from drinking cleaning fluids?

So if schizophrenia doesn't mean 'split personality' what does it mean.  In psychiatric medicine there is a differentiation between thought disorders, mood disorders, paraphilias, etc. Schizophrenia is a thought disorder. It simple terms it means that the schizophrenic brain perceives reality differently than everyone else.  If you and i watch a totally fictional TV movie about a man who can talk to plants, the schizophrenic might watch the same thing and think it's a message from the creator directed at him/her personally, so that he/she finally understands that he/she was put on the earth to go around talking to plants.

That's an oversimplification but it's accurate enough to show you that schizophrenia has nothing to do with a split personality.  The "split" is with reality.  In extreme cases, when a schizophrenic is very psychotic, they may hear multiple voices telling them conflicting things; they may perceive heat as cold or vice versa; they may step on a nail and not feel the pain; they might see a soda machine turn into the face of a demonic robot laughing at them, or shadows on a pond turn into angels who beckon them to come into the water and ignore the fact they can't swim.

While the cause of schizophrenia remains unknown and while some treatments or medications are questionable in some cases, a very large number of persons with this disease have been able to return to something like a normal life by taking anti-psychotic medication.  It typically appears when a person is between 18 and 21, affects people of all races and ethnicities as well as both genders and has what are known as positive as well as negative symptoms. Negative symptoms would be things like not speaking, ignoring people who talk to you, isolating in a room or under a bridge, in short withdrawing into another world. Positive symptoms are things like talking to oneself, doing very bizarre and/or dangerous things, speaking in long rambling nonsensical monologues, etc.  Not all schizophrenics experience the same symptoms or experience them to the same degree. Some never hear voices. Some always hear voices. Some never have hallucinations.  Some are paranoid and angry. Some are not paranoid at all and laugh about anything and everything.  There is no correlation between intelligence and schizophrenia.  Some are very bright. Some are not.

And by the way, "split personality" or "multiple personality disorder" (believing you have different 'selves' controlling your life) doesn't exist. We'll get to that later. The famous book that started it all "Sybil" was a total fabrication. A like. A fake.

Don't believe me? Click here http://www.npr.org/2011/10/20/141514464/real-sybil-admits-multiple-personalities-were-fake

Fast food, fast cars, fast knowledge

I can't recall the name of the comedian who said the modern world has made us all impatient.  She (i remember it was a she) had a line that went, "I bought my father a microwave and now he stands there and yells at it saying 'Come on! I don't have all minute!'" Which nicely sums up the American attitude toward coffee as well as the economy. Fix it NOW!

But some things in life take time, that's all there is to it. I was once speaking to a geologist who said to me, 'do you realize that any rock in your driveway is at least a million years old?'  A million years and it's still a rock. It hasn't been ground into sand or dust yet. That takes another million or so years. Like it or not, you can stand over your tomato plants and threaten them and call them names but that isn't going to get you a fresh tomato any sooner.

Here's a shocker for some of you:  getting a bit of information from the TV, radio, magazines, newspapers or the CNN website has nothing to do with knowledge and education.

It used to be against the law for someone to ride into town, gather a crowd and hold up a bottle of colored water with flavoring in it, claim it would cure gout, rheumatism, heart disease, athletes foot and warts on your buttocks and then collect money from suckers who couldn't wait to buy a bottle or ten.  Apparently that's no longer true.  You can say any damn fool thing you want, even something that is scientifically incorrect or made up and get away with it in print or on the airwaves. People can compare Barack Obama to Hitler and be listened to, despite the fact that even a cursory reading of the totalitarian regime the nazis imposed isn't remotely similar to anything any president has ever put into place. The Bush administration can stand in front of the American people and lie - lie - about Iraq's role in the September 11th attacks and weapons of mass destruction and drag the entire country into war and nobody bats an eyelash except a few cranks like me who are called "unpatriotic." (For the record, staunch conservative Bill O'Reilly admitted on the David Letterman show a few nights ago that going to war with Iraq was a mistake but he supported the invasion because all of the "reportage" indicated weapons of mass destruction. So much for accurate reportage).  So yes, you can sell snake oil. And if you get caught at it, nobody's going to say or do a damn thing.  If you've been following the news you know that Bernie Madoff has been bragging in letters to friends about being treated like a celebrity in prison. He ought to be scrubbing toilets with a toothbrush for $3.50 an hour, all wages to go to some charity. He ought to be sold into slavery. But instead he's a guest of the taxpayers and laughing about it. All things considered, not a bad ending to his story, considering what would have happened to him in, say, Saudi Arabia if he had embezzled the king's money.

But I digress.

So back to the questions: what do you "know" and how did you "learn" it?

Learning takes time.  You have to do a little research, ask people more knowledgeable than yourself, read more, more research, re-consider your hypothesis, examine things from different angles, etc.  And most people are not willing to do that.  They want the answer NOW.  And dishonest politicians and arrogant know-it-all talk show hosts are happy to provide them with an answer now.  A wrong answer, an answer that is poorly thought out, an answer where repercussions are never considered, but what the hell, it's a bunch of words that sound good.

Unfortunately, if you get your "information" from people who aren't experts, might as well have a bright seventeen year old high school student with a copy of "Cardiac Surgery for Dummies" do your quadruple bypass.

Something to think about at this moment in time . . .

"Who is the greater criminal: he who robs a bank or he who founds one?" - Bertolt Brecht

(i've also read a variation of this that goes 'who is the bigger criminal - the man that robs one person with a knife or the man who robs a thousand with a pen'. take your pick)

Depression Era Joke

 Here's a joke from the American depression, 1930s. It was told to me by a Republican who thought it was hilarious.

     A young boy is hitchhiking and a car comes along. The driver leans across the seat and asks 'You a Republican or Democrat?" The boy replies "Democrat!" and the car speeds off.  This happens over and over again.
     It's getting late, the kid is tired, and a car pulls over. It's driven by an attractive woman whose blouse reveals a lot of cleavage. "Republican or Democrat?," she asks. Finally getting smart the boy happily shouts out "Republican!"
     As they drive along, the woman places a hand on the boy's knee and massages it for a while. She then slowly pulls up the hem of her skirt a bit and turns to him and winks.  Soon she's stopped the car, they're in the back seat and the kid is having the time of his life.  When it's all over, the woman asks "Well, what did you think?"
     "Wow!," replies the boy "I've only been a Republican for twenty minutes and I already fucked someone."

Creating Jobs, Pt. 2

"You know, each business is run for the benefit of its owners, its sharEHOlders, its customers AnD its employees. It' s not run for the benefit of the COuntry. That's not whY people run businesses." 
 - Bill Frezza, a venture capitalist and a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute 


     (The above quote comes from an interview on NPR's "Morning Edition" earlier this week. You can hear the whole thing if you want by going here: http://www.npr.org/2011/10/04/141033128/venture-capitalist-cautions-against-job-creation-myths)


     What's wrong with that quote? Re-read it. If you say "makes sense to me," then you can join Bill Frezza and others who should be labeled as self-serving bastards (SSBs).  Businesses aren't run for the benefit of the country? Hmmmmm....sounds to me like some people want to take without giving back, enjoy getting rich in a country that let's them start a business without giving back to that country. Sounds downright unpatriotic to me.  Sounds like "thanks, America, for providing me with a place to earn millions of dollars without having to give a shit about the people who helped me earn it."
     Here's a simple idea that used to exist in all communities: a town, a state, a country, a family, a village, a tribe, a clan, whatever, is made of people who have to compromise and get along to survive.  If Og the cavemen had a good day hunting and Nung the caveman didn't, they shared what they had so they might survive and hunt another day. And you should be glad they did - that's how you and i got here.  We - you and i - are the end result of millions of years of humans having sex and creating babies and then successfully raising those babies to make more babies. And what allowed them to make and raise all those babies in the centuries before antibiotics, central heating and TV was sharing and cooperating.  That's how we got here - you, me, Rush Limbaugh, Mother Theresa, Warren Buffett, Osama Bin Laden, all of us. Our biological ancestors sacrified "for the common" good, at least to some extent. Even a king knows that if he wants to have lots of servants and a big army, he has to distribute enough food and money so that his citizens won't die of starvation. Otherwise, no servants, no soldiers.
     But now in America (and the rest of the world) we have SSBs like Bill Frezza who believe that if they invest money they should get it back AND with a fat profit, thank you very much.  Use ten percent of my wealth to create a college scholarship fund? What are you, crazy? Just give it away?  That's enough for second vacation home. Give some of my time each week to help the old lady down the block do her grocery shopping? What the fuck is wrong with you?!?! That's my golf day. Where's the bernefit to me in that?
     This is how SSBs think. Me first. Mine first. Stay off my property. Don't touch my things. "I was smart and energetic and i worked hard to get where i am, and that's the way capitalism works and that's the American way so why should i give away my "hard earned money"?
     First of all, rich people don't have "hard earned money." Maybe they did once, but not now.  People who clean toilets for $8 an hour or dig ditches in the rain or work two jobs to send their kid to a decent school have "hard earned money."  People who have vacation homes and can afford to pay someone to clean their non-vacation home and who ride around in expensive cars and can write a check to pay for their kids' college tuition, they just have money.  Nothing hard earned about it.  (If you disagree, i invite you to get a job at MacDonald's for three months and let me know how you much fun it was).
     Second, not being willing to give back some of that "hard earned money" tells the world you don't give a rat's ass about anyone but yourself and your pals.  It's quite literally like saying "you can starve for all I care" or "why should i give a crap if your kid can't afford surgery"?  By being unwilling to share, you send the message that some people "aren't worth" your time/effort/money.  In other words, some peoples' live are more valuable or necessary than others.  That is, frankly, sick. 
     I'm not stupid bleeding heart liberal. I'm not saying that we can solve all problems by turning the rich upside down and shaking the change out of their pockets.  Individuals bear some responsibility.  I think most of us agree that someone who has been through a drug treatment program 12 times in 12 years and still can't stay clean and sober has not made good use of the opportunities afforded them. So no more free ride for you, pal.  On the other hand, people who go through a drug treatment program twice in twelve years and are struggling to afford night school deserve a leg up. There's a difference. At least to me. Not to a lot of rich people and businessmen.  Remember, Bill Frezza says companies are only responsible for making money for themselves and their investors and employees, they're not beholden to the country that provides them with a place to set up shop.
     As long as companies and the wealthy and banks think like Mr Frezza and other SSBs, the economy will continue to suffer and the gap between the rich and poor will grow.  The SSBs are the people telling you that if only their taxes were lowered the extra cash would be used to create jobs.  The SSBs are the ones telling you that it's the government's stupid regulations that keep them from creating jobs. If you believe these tales,  then perhaps you should look for a leprechaun to pay off your mortgage.  People like Bill Frezza are out there in large numbers and, as his interview attests, they aren't the least bit shy about revealing their motives.  There are many reasons we don't have enough jobs.  One of them is all the Bill Frezzas and SSBs who firmly believe that if they can't get rich doing something, there's simply no point in doing it.

Creating Jobs, Pt 1

   Note: if you have ANY interest in the topic of jobs creation and unemployment, you really need to set aside about 50 minutes to listen to this fantastic, in-depth podcast from "This American Life" in which they prove that politicians cannot create jobs. That's good to know in an election year. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/435/how-to-create-a-job

 "grow the economy," "create jobs,"  "build the economy," "jumpstart the economy," etc. We're alll sick of these phrases but get ready, because an election year is coming up fast and you'll hear them over and over.  So now it's time to think about this question: can a government actually create jobs?
     I'll show you how easy it is to create jobs. I have a lot of twigs and sticks and stuff in my yard that need to be picked up. I will pay someone five dollars a day to come over and do the job. I would like to hire three people to get it done quickly. There. I've just created three jobs. If you want one, contact me. No benefits, five bucks for eight hours work.
    Now I'll create a hundred more jobs.  I think it would be funny to see a hundred people walking down the street in their underwear.  I would make a video of one hundred people in their underwear and post it on You Tube.  So I'm looking for a hundred people to do this.  I will pay fifty cents to each person.  It's about a hour's work. Cost to me, fifty bucks. Let me know if you need the job.
     So there, I just created 105 jobs. Didn't take long. Didn't take an act of congress or a huge investment.
     What's that you say? They are temporary jobs with no benefits that pay shit?  So nobody will want them?  You're right! And even if they did, they wouldn't make enough money to make an impact on the economy. They wouldn't suddenly be able to afford to buy a house or a car and accessorize it or decorate it. Nevertheless, i created jobs. You can't argue that point.  Stupid, pointless, worthless jobs, but jobs nonetheless.
     So why isn't this being done on a large scale? Why aren't people with lots of money offering to pay people to do all sorts of things, pay them a reasonable living wage?  That's a good question, isn't it? The money's out there. Bill Gates has some. Warren Buffett has some. Large companies like Monsanto and General Electric and Dow Chemical and Bank of America and others have some.  Celebrities and professional athletes and rock stars and investors have some.  So are they spending it to create any jobs? That's a question that needs to be looked into, doesn't it?
     The problem with creating jobs is not governmental regulations, although it's true some governmental regulations are stupid and discourage entrepreneurship to a degree. The fundamental problem is that people with money don't want to spend it unless they are sure they will get it back plus a big profit.  Businesses and banks operate according to a dictum that states profits should always go up.  If profits went up 3% in the first quarter, 6% in the second quarter, 8% in the third quarter and dropped to 5% in the fourth quarter, that's UNACCEPTABLE.  My God, what's happened??? The profits went down!!!! We had a loss!!! Quick, have my secretary cancel the Christmas bonuses, tell my wife to fire the gardner and make sure that my vacation in Aruba includes a beach front condo, not one of those crappy ones where you can't see the water.
     That's the paradigm you are dealing with folks. Investment back plus a profit everytime.  If things go sour, the boss never takes a cut, the investors don't say 'well we took a chance and didn't do so well.'  That's what investment was originally about - taking a chance. You bought into a company that seemed like it would be a winner. Sometimes you were right, sometimes you weren't. That's how it goes. Tough shit. Don't look to farmers for sympathy. Some years they get good weather and big harvests, some years crummy weather and low harvests.
     Let me let you in on a little secret: the idea that profits should always go up and investors should always go up was MADE UP by the heads of corporations and wealthy investors.  There is no basis in reality for these believes. None. Stating that profits should be expected to go up is as empty a statement as saying you had Bigfoot over to the house last Saturday to play pinocle and he brought Mrs Bigfoot and you all ended up going out for drinks and dancing.
     Wise up and stop believing everything some rich guy in a suit and tie tells you.

Bag of Bricks

     To appreciate my approach to solving big problems in economics, education, social policy, etc. you need to be familiar with my 'bag of bricks' metaphor.  It goes like this.
     How many bricks can you put inside an ordinary paper grocery bag before the bottom falls out? You don't know. I don't know. There's only one way to find out. Someone holds the bag open and you put in a brick. Then you put in another, and another and so on until the bag rips. However many bricks you put in before the bag ripped, that's your answer. If you want to be more scientific, repeat the experiment a few dozen times and average the results.  Let's say, to make a point, the average brown paper grocery bag can reliably hold five bricks before it rips apart. That's a piece of factual information, data. It's reliable, you found out by testing. So if someone says to you "I've got to take these ten bricks out to my car, do you have a paper grocery bag to put them in?" You can authoritatively reply "The bag won't hold that many."
     In the world, particularly in America, we like forge ahead and do things without knowing how many bricks will rip the bag.  Dump toxic waste into rivers? Sure, why not.  Remove all federal regulations on business so they can create jobs?** Sounds great!  The problem is, whenever we've tried these things, we end up with a pile of bricks on the floor and torn paper bag in our hand.  We look at the mess and say "ooops!"
     The trouble with this approach is that "oooops!" is not a good thing to say after you've poisoned half the wells in a given community, or implemented a policy that backfires horribly.  Doctors don't get to say "ooops!" if you go into the hospital for heart surgery and they saw off both your feet.  A carpenter doesn't get to say "ooops!" if you hire him to fix your roof and he puts a big hole in it and drives away.
     Yet we - and i mean you and me, everybody in the world - have allowed (and i do mean allowed) public officials and heads of companies to say "ooops!" and walk away from huge disasters, laughing.  We allow our so-called leaders to pass laws permitting things that are no smarter than loading bricks into a paper bag until it rips. Then when it rips they all trip over each other looking for someone to blame.
      So, here's what should be done, going forward.  If someone wants to do something that is clearly dangerous like, say, dump radioactive waste into a river or allow four-year-old kids to play with loaded guns, they should be forced to conduct the 'bag of bricks' test.  Dump some radioactive waste in some water and drink it and wait to see what happens. Get some little kids together and give them loaded handguns and see what happens.  Then you'll have some information to base your policies on.
     Or we can keep doing it the stupid way, just passing laws based on something an alleged expert said and uttering a collective "oooops!" when we're up to our knees in undrinkable water, poverty, ignorance, crime and out of control inflation.


** - a further post will be devoted to what a country looks like without the EPA and OSHA - China. I've been there. Another post will be devoted to the world we had in the 19th century when people like the Carnegies and Rockefellers were free to do whatever they wanted because there was no income tax (!) and no federal regulations to stop them.  The results in both cases, history records, were not good

Introduction/explanation

    Two things you should known about me...


1. Unlike a lot bloggers, I know how to write.
2. Politically, I'm a registered independent, though i've yet to vote for a Republican.
   
  I worked as a professional freelance journalist for about twelve years and won a National Newspaper Association award (third place) for a profile piece i did, a Connecticut Society of Professional Journalists award (first place) for a piece on UFOs, and First Place for Overall Excellence from the University of Missouri School of Journalism (shared with other freelances) for a newspaper to which i contributed regularly.
     I am generally known among my friends as a very intelligent, observant person who speaks without editing himself and shoots his mouth off without thinking.  I admit this is true. Although I have gotten better at toning things down.
     I started a few blogs over the years and ended them for several reasons. Mostly they weren't well done, bottom line. This blog is intended as nothing more than a repository for some of my writing.  My friends don't want me to constantly send them long diatribes or essays, so I'm posting them here for anyone to read when they are up to it.
     This blog is aimed at giving you reference sources and general information about "stories of the day," the real story behind the story that people overlook, hear once and forget about, etc.  People are literally assaulted at every turn by stories and opinions about the economy, war, social issues, etc. but very little of the discussion is informed, based on fact or makes any sort of sense.  There is far too much stupid - and i mean stupid - discourse out there; too many people with middling IQs and no facts to back them up shouting and screaming.  They should sit down and shut up and learn something. Would you take your watch or car apart if you didn't own any tools and never fixed anything in your life? Of course not. But this doesn't stop people with no real understanding of law, economics, history, etc from taking a handful of unrelated facts and trying to shove them down your throat as if they were Moses coming down off the mountain with his tablets.
     The sad fact is that most of us are too busy to become truly informed or educated. But if you don't, your only sources of "information" are self-serving blowhards, liars, marketing experts, fanatics with an axe to grind, religious zealots and generally dumb people who really shouldn't be allowed to have the jobs they have.
     If you follow this blog, you will read concise pieces (something i wasn't generally known for in the past) that lay out simple arguments/discussions based on the principles of logic and research.  If you're one of those folks that doesn't like to be confronted with research that contradicts your ideas, you will be, to say the least, disappointed by me. If you are one of those people who isn't open minded enough to consider an alternative paradigm or a change in the social order, you will find your brain bruised by the writing you find here.