Quasi-Con

I have been reading Op-ed articles for over 30 years now.  I'm not sure who or what started my interest in reading opinion pieces.  I remember liking Mike Royko, probably because he was witty and irreverent.  It's been over a dozen years since I subscribed to a newspaper.  With the advent of the internet, printed papers have become unnecessary. 

There are people that I read or listen to because I agree with them.  There are people that I read because I disagree with them, but I enjoy being challenged by their thinking.  I suspect that other people share the same fascination.  Rush Limbaugh has made an outstanding career and a small fortune out of this phenomenon; as have other personalities, like Ann Landers and Dear Abby.

One of the reasons I am drawn to this type of entertainment is because I want to see how someone with a particular viewpoint addresses an issue.  Let's be honest about this point, it is mostly entertainment, not education, not information.  Why do people tune into Dr. Laura or Dr. Phil?  We like seeing train wrecks.  We also like hearing our thoughts in other people's voices.  Has there ever been a Dr. Laura show where the answer to at least one segment wasn't, "get off your back and quit being a slut"?  We like that answer.  We wish we were able to say something just like it, but for some reason we don't.

The Op-ed Page is a lot like that.  We know that the world is a giant train wreck.  We like hearing other people articulate our rather sensible solutions to todays problems.  Some authors like a Pat Buchannan or Walter Williams are going to come at a problem from a fixed philosophical perspective.   If you understand their perspective you can probably know their conclusion without reading the piece.  The enjoyment comes from watching them work out and articulate the solution.

Other authors have a fixed solution but no overall philosophical perspective.  While we see this idiocy in many left leaning people, they don't bother me as much.  The leftist wants a utopia without effort.  The quasi-conservative wants a different utopia, one without fixed philosophical principle.  The reason the leftist doesn't cause me as much concern is that he will never achieve his goals.  Indeed he cannot.  Contradicting ideas produce contradicting results.  The leftist will forever spend his time rushing about pandering to the loudest whimpering's of whatever aggrieved group is in vogue de jure.

The quasi-conservative is a much worse creature.  He is articulating a vision of something that does work.  His world is a good place.  Good people recognize it when he speaks of it.  The quasi-conservative (Quasi-Con) assumes the utopia without a solid philosophical perspective. 

The Quasi-Con wants a world where everyone lives according to fixed principles.  He wants to count on others behaving themselves in a predictable fashion.  He wants the benefit of an ordered society based on immutable philosophical principles.  He is willing and wants to live with them.  He is willing to go along with them.  He doesn't understand those principles, because he doesn't share them. That is why he is powerless to communicate anything beyond a desire to live in a Quasi-Con Utopia.

I suspect this is part of why I find Lord Monckton such a frustrating read.  He starts off well.  He means well.  He ends up with solutions that are void of fixed philosophical principle.  Which is why he ends up supporting guns, except of course these guns, under these circumstances, or free speech except for this kind of speech.  A principle isn't a principle if you have to surround it with a fence of exceptions.

Thought Experiment

I'd like everyone to try a thought experiment.

For purposes of this experiment we have to go back in time to the Garden of Eden.  We are assuming that there are only three kinds of beings (lower animals are not 'beings').  The first being is God.  The second are angelic creatures (faithful or fallen).  The third is mankind.  In the subset of mankind there are two and only two creatures Adam and Eve.

For our purposes Adam and Eve have not fallen or sinned yet. 

Given:

• Adam and Eve are able to be in the presence of God and speak/interact with Him
• Adam and Eve are able to be in the presence of angelic creatures and speak/interact with them
• Adam and Eve are cloaked in shekinah
• Adam and Eve do not have to contend with death or a known limit to their life span
• Adam was given dominion/authority over creation
• There are only three commandments to which Adam is subject, two positive and one negative:
• Tend the garden
• Produce offspring
• Don't eat from the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil

Prove:

• Adam was restricted to a 3 dimensional reality

Since we have no way of knowing when Adam and Eve sinned we cannot know exactly how long they lived in the Garden.  Presumably Adam sinned sometime between his creation and his 130th year since that is the age we are given for the birth of his son.  We don't know how long he lived in a sinless state or exactly what that state was like.  What we do know is that there is a provision for marking time days/seasons/years but time itself has no real meaning if life is limitless.

Mankind currently exists and is limited inside three dimensions of space and one dimension of time.  Does it follow that we always have been limited in this way?

Please weigh in with your position even if you don't believe in a literal Adam and Eve.  It's an experiment in thought, not empirical data.  FWIW, I'm assuming that our universe exists in a 10 dimensional reality.

Who Needs Al Gore?

 I just got out of bed today.  When I came home this morning there was a slight rain falling.  It wasn't much, more of a mist really.  The temperature was a bit cool and I was wearing a jacket for the first time since spring.

 

Wyoming produces something in the area of 40% of the nations coal.  We have the newest coal fired power plants in the United States.  As a state we are involved in a lawsuit with the EPA right now over our right to regulated our own power plants (the cleanest in the nation).  The EPA claims we are destroying the environment.

 

Here is the view from my front door as of 10 min ago:

 

Enjoy your global warming.  It's not doing much for my garden.  You'd think with all of our coal we'd catch a break and keep warmer temps and sunshine well into the second week of September.

Pasta

Becky prepared a pasta dish for a dinner party she was giving. In her haste, however, she forgot to refrigerate the spaghetti sauce, and it sat on the counter all day.

She was worried that it might have spoiled, but it was too late to cook up another batch. She called the local Poison Control Center and voiced her concern. They advised Becky to boil the sauce again.

That night, the phone rang during dinner, and one of the guests volunteered to answer it.  Becky cringed as the guest called out, “It’s the Poison Control Center. They want to know how the spaghetti sauce turned out.”

Taking the OT

We're shorthanded at work. 

We do offer health insurance to everyone working over 35 hours per week.  We don't pay much.  We also have a unemployment rate of under 3%.  Much of the unemployment we have is seasonal, meaning its the fall and jobs that are weather conditional like construction are starting to wind down.  None of this helps us get workers.  We can't even seem to attract some college kids to help out between class or on the weekends.

I've been getting crazy amounts of overtime.  I put in almost 80 hours since last Saturday. Next week looks like more of the same.  I'll try to come up with a blog post or two.  After working nearly non stop now that I have a day off my wife slave driver has plans for my 24 hour period of free time.

Ringer vs ringer

The pope met with the College of Cardinals to discuss a proposal from Shimon Peres, the former leader of Israel.

“Your Holiness,” said one of the cardinals, “Mr. Peres wants to determine whether Jews or Catholics are superior by challenging you to a golf match.”

The pope was greatly disturbed, as he had never held a golf club in his life.

“Not to worry,” said the cardinal, “we’ll call America and talk to Jack Nicklaus. We’ll make him a cardinal, he can play Shimon Peres. We can’t lose!”

Everyone agreed it was a good idea. The call was made and, of course, Jack was honored and agreed to play.

The day after the match, Nicklaus reported to the Vatican to inform the pope of his success in the contest.

“I came in second, Your Holiness,” said Nicklaus.

“Second?!” exclaimed the surprised pope. “You came in second to Shimon Peres?!”

“No,” said Nicklaus, “second to Rabbi Woods.”