fauxlaw

We have become so critical of one another over the variety of physical characteristics we individually express that we begin to think all we are is just skin-deep, and that nothing of consequence occurs deeper.

That this is an incorrect attitude is what mostly has us at each other's teeth.

Can we give it a rest?

Skin deep matters about as much as that clouds change shape, and that nowhere on

Earth does the climate maintain within ±1.5ºC, let alone that none of us express as either black or white as my Crayola crayon set exhibits them.

Not to mention that none of us determined these differences by ourselves in any natural process when born. We are what we are by generations preceding us. Can't we just accept that and move on?

You're sure stuck on color, aren't you? Does it really matter? Just on Earth, we express in many different colors, yet, according to the Human Genome Project, there is no race, and, in spite of our variation, humans are 99.99% identical, genetically. I expect that other humanoid species in the universe do not alter that percentage much, so, what's the big deal, anyway?

Hung up on age as well, aren't you? Jealous? Age generally = experience, and it isn't gained but by day-to-day. Mine are more than yours. Get over it, because we all get there eventually. What really matters is the attitude toward any of these human characteristics. I just can't get wrapped around the axle about it all. We are what we are, everywhere in the universe.

 The most recent sovereign border changes, both recognized and unrecognized by the UN are noted below. Note that the last recognized change took place in 2011. This is not as frequent as you allege.

1. The Russian Annexations (2022): Russia formally claimed annexed regions of Ukraine (including Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson) in late 2022, though these borders are widely unrecognized internationally and heavily contested on the ground.
2. South Sudan [2011] gained independence from Sudan, creating a new sovereign boundary recognized by the U.N.
3. Kosovo (2008): Declared independence from Serbia, creating a new European boundary, though it lacks universal UN recognition.
4. Montenegro and Serbia (2006): Peacefully split their state union into two fully independent, recognized countries with distinct borders. 

You are objecting to something I did not say. I said, "I fully accept the existence of alien life."

My argument is not against the existence of aliens, but the quality of the video.

So, as you are not an expert in video editing

No, you're still putting words in my mouth. Did I say I did not have expertise in video editing? No, I am not familiar with old-school film projection, although I do have analog sound recording and editing. Video-based audio is another matter, in which I do have cam and playback and editing experience. But your original post featured film projection, which may have been converted to video for the recent movie, but the original is old-school analog, photo-chemical and sound recording production. THAT is my argument, and it is lousy evidence as a result.

I have to add that in old school, analog film and sound editing, sound and film were virtually always edited separately, so, in spite of photochemical processing of film, and analog sound, neither could be edited but by cut-and-paste, but the sound portion was much more easily edited, and should have been edited accordingly.

Misterio,

Sorry, I let this thread drop. Thanks for your post. Considering that, genetically, all 8B of us are 99.99% identical, even considering sex differentiation, I think we should try to get along better than we do. That means abandoning most of what we think separates us, because they really don't - or should not - separate us al all.

So, Mamdami decided to extend his communism to Staten Island. It is, after all, one of the five boroughs of NYC, but a politically conservative place. He lasted a minute before being booed from the stage. He'll likely avoid the 60% R-voter Southland of NYC for the remainder of his term. Bye-bye, ma'mi.

Debby,

Trump adopted the Nazi salute.

Hate to burst your TDS bubble, but this is not a nazi salute. This salute has been around since the ancient Greeks, at least, and is a positive, even aggressive claim of pride, accomplishment, and victory. Try again. There are illustrations of Trump offering the nazi salute, but, being an illustrator, myself, I could draw you with the same gesture. Does that make it real anywhere but in TDS?

a particle cannot have a periodicity, nor can it be spread out in space.

Albert Einstein and some associates, in about 1935, theorized a concept they called "Quantum Entanglement," which refutes your claim of particle non-periodicity and non-spread [expansion or proliferation?] in space.

a particle cannot have a periodicity, nor can it be spread out in space.

Albert Einstein and some associates, in about 1935, theorized a concept they called "Quantum Entanglement," which refutes your claim of particle non-periodicity and non-spread [expansion or proliferation?] in space.

Look, I grew up in L.A., in Brentwood, where much of Hollowood used to live, and maybe still does. Don't know; I moved from there in 1969, went to France, lived there a few years, and returned to San Francisco. But, considering that I call it Hollowood, you can imagine what I think about video produced that claims to be legit film footage.

The operative word is skeptical, even though I fully accept the existence of alien life, sasquatch, and the potential for current dinosaurs. I also consider petroleum to be a renewable resource. It is organic-based, after all, and last I looked, organic stuff still lives, dies and decomposes, and has, continuously, for hundreds of millions of years. So, greenies are as whacko as these movie producers of poor films. Pure Hollowood.

That's fine, but the sound is a factor that can be edited out in a modern editing setting. Do we really need that rattle to convince us it is old film? The film demonstrates that. And the focus issue is... because? We have an entire generation of videographers who do not know how to focus? I'm suspicious it's because they're hiding detail for a reason.

The 2010 video was poorly shot, out of focus, loss of detail. Digital photography, even in 2010, was better than that. Now 15 years later, and no improvement? Nope, the tech is still leaps and bounds better than 2010, but this is still backward, amateur film work.

Sound is also atrocious. Why are we hearing a prop engine even when on the ground filming alleged gray people with big heads? Are the grays engines, too? I recorded better stuff than this at 7 years old, and I'm no sound engineer. No wonder aliens think we are easy targets.

This dog won't hunt.

All the -isms of the world are myopic. Listening to them is just confusion. Asking God a time-based question is the wrong question since his time reference isn't. It's eternal. With reference to God, Christ gave the best example of prayer by the Lord's Prayer, but he did not intend those words be the prayer. Only words that come from your heart are heard in heaven, generally. What do you think, yourself? That's what God wants to hear. The Lord's Prayer's attitude is how to pray; positive, detailed, and suggestive. "Lord, here's what I think..." is what He wants to hear. Express your own thinking of the attributes you want to find in a wife by marriage.

You're not likely to find a suitable wife on an internet site, but probably not in a bar, either. And then, what kind of husband do you want to be, and be it. That will attract the kind of woman you want in a wife. I've been married for 53 years because marriage is not a 50-50 proposition. Each gives 100%. That's what we've tried to do, and that works.

Trump has succeeded in increasing his wealth while serving as President.

To Debby; Show me the legal statute that prevents a president from increasing their wealth in private business during a term in office. The president is exempt from general criminal conflict-of-interest statutes and is not required to divest from private assets or place them into a blind trust, even though Trump did that in his first term. The reason why Congress cannot do it is that their legislative action does have potential direct effect on the economy and thus, their personal wealth. The president is only cautioned about emoluments. Look it up. Also, by the way, consider that Trump is the only president other than JFK who has denied taking a presidential salary, and he's doing it twice. Fair enough, or is your TDS too overwhelming?

Your commiunist bride. She may carry bright, yellow flowers to flash you,

but the marriage bed night will be your last. This routine does not last beyond a single typical human lifetime - less than 100 years. Never more. Never will be. So why even tempt the first day?

My current free-market economy has endured continuously for the last 400 years, and counting. Now that's a bride worth cultivating.

If you think I am trying to bring communism "back," you're more whacko than I thought. Communism has never left. It's always been here. Its root is Eden. No, we do not need to "Get ourselves back to the Garden" as was a popular phrase from Woodstock. Adam and Eve hopped the train from there, seeking a new adventure from communism, but Satan managed to re-plant it. Karl Marx is no inventor. He merely transcribed, but it's a poor rendition, and it is already a proven failure. Never worked longer than a single human lifetime. Ever.

"Communists everywhere?" your words, not mine. Did I ever say they're everywhere? Not in my home.

My products? A free-market economy is an eternal product because there is no limit to its growth potential. "There comes a time when you have made enough money," Oba'a said. "Free-market" is more than mere money, but that's where Oba'a stops. That's his problem to solve. Yours, too, apparently.

You're saying that faith = belief. Nope. Not even Paul says that in Hebrews. He is saying faith is substance. He is saying we may have more than 5 senses to interpret our world and its universe. Belief entertains none of this because it does not have to demonstrate anything. No demands are placed on belief, whereas the world, and more is demanded of faith. Faith expects acting on whatever one has faith in. There's a common Christian claim that both faith and works are not necessary; that faith, alone, suffices. Paul does not say that, anywhere [including Hebrews]. I know Jesus is the Christ, so I am not coming from an agnostic or atheist perspective.

6,000 years? The Bible has gaps in its chronology, it is not a continuous record from Genesis to Revelation. Just in Genesis, we see a gap, and even a regression. We're basically told the creation story in Genesis 1. But Genesis 2 begins saying there is nothing on the earth, and tells the story, again. What's that about? I think I know, but that is grist for another time. And the "day'of Genesis is not 24 hours, because the sun, which now rises in the morning, and rises again some 24 hours later, as demonstrated even by the ancient Greeks, at least, is not even created until the 4th day, 60% into the "6 days'" of creation.

"Day" in Hebrew ["Yom'] is not a specific period of time. Creation itself was much longer than 144 hours, my friend. Maybe billions of our years, now. What is time to God? Does it matter? Not to Him. So, 6,000 years cannot be justified. Is Moses confused between Genesis 1 and 2? Did Elijah halt the sun for a period of time? Why do we not encounter Mary, the mother of Jesus, again in the biblical record after his crucifixion and resurrection? Joseph, her husband, by the way, [an unimportant character, after all?] disappears from the record after they find Jesus in the temple when Jesus is 12. Where did he go? Why? Will you insist that Jesus ignored his own mother once he resurrected? Or, is the Bible great advice, in fact, the best, as far as it goes, but is an imperfect and incomplete record as we have it, today? Like, earth being around longer than 6,000 years? And why do some Christians insist the Old Testament is unnecessary today [so do not print it], so should be ignored today? Christ said he fulfilled the Law, not ignored it. He references it multiple times, so it must still have relevance, even though Christ, himself, replaced the 1o commandments [in fact, the whole of the Torah] with 2. Those two, alone, take care of the rest, but that does not mean the history should be ignored. I'm suspicious that the first set of commandments given to Moses on Sinai may have been just the two, but it was obvious the Israelites were not yet ready for that level of devotion, let alone trust to/in God.

I am a devoted Christian, by the way, just not deluded by a 6,000-year chronology of Earth, and accepting that the Bible is not infallible. God did not write it, did

He?

What constitutes "evidence" since that word is the whole argument for or against God. Well, that depends on whether one is speaking about justice, science, philosophy, religion, or their own justification of existence. Define that much, first, and then follow the separate definitions accordingly, because they are not always the same. Sometimes, they are. Even just in religion, people are hung up on two words: faith and belief. Often, they are used interchangeably, even biblically, or in any other religious texts that contain both words. However, Paul, in Hebrews 11, offers the best biblical definition there is. He draws a distinction between belief and faith in verse 1: "...faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Mere belief of some statement does not have evidence, or it would be something else. It would be faith, for that has evidence. What evidence? Substance, Paul says, of what is hoped for, but currently not seen [or heard, smelled, tasted, or touched]. This must mean we must have more than these five senses, and we do have them available to us. They can be learned, and science is beginning to demonstrate by empirical study that this is so. Echo location, earth magnetic force fields, and others, which are senses other animals have, and some

[all?] can be learned by humans.

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=can+humans+learn+senses+demonsttrated+by+other+animals%2C&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

But some animals have sensory organs we do not have, says science. What says we cannot grow them? See Yoda with Luke Shytwalker on Dagoba. ["The

Empire Strikes Back"]

El Sayed [MI] wins by an entire 1%. Wow! A landslide! MI does not register voters by party affiliation, but, generally, in MI, voter registration is 53.2% by voting for a Democrat candidate, and is 30.2% voting for a Republican. That's a 23% spread. Typically, the "Democrat," El Sayed, should have won by a lot more than a single digit of 1.

What's different? El Sayed is not a Democrat. He aligns with the Democrat 'Socialists of

America, but that's not even a political party. He does not talk like even a recent Democrat. And with a post-victory[?] comment like advocating collective union bargaining for all [i.e., every worker a union worker] he talks like a communist.

Oh, but that's a bad word, isn't it? The non-party says it's 'socialist,' and is an advocate for karlmarxism. But, his Manifesto was Communist, not Socialist, so, let's call it what it is, huh? What, too harsh for you?

And how does El Sayed justify saying "Union collective bargaining for all" while saying, in the virtual next sentence, that workers should be "self-determinative?"

How do you self-determine when serving up your personal wage bargaining power to a union rep who may not even know your name if you met on the street? That's not self-determinism, boys and girls. Learn your union-speak, because it does not have

'self-determinism' in its dictionary. Words mean things, and woke definition is not in any dictionary.

See my response $15 to Double, who was twice-over wrong. You, too?

we’ve already lived through a major soft pedaling event historians will be writing about for centuries… the rise of Trump.

Tell me the historian who, merely 160 years later, writes about Andrew Johnson, 1865-1869, our Reconstruction disaster?

You're a fan of McCarthy, amiright?

McCarthy, who? Joseph? No. Kevin? No. You keep claiming you know me. You don't. Get it? Yet?

Keep dancing my friend.

People around the world soft-peddled the Marx Commuinist Manifesto in 1848, and Hitler in 1938, and the PRC in 1949, when I was born. In those 101 years, Those blinde3d morons lived to regret their soft-shoe dance. Just like yours.

Dance, dance, dance on.

Y'all've been warned. I've been warning since 1966. Call me crazy; y'all have that right. Doesn't make it right. We'll see, won't we?

They are what? Convicted? By whom? Your personal jumping jack court?

...as a response to US aggression.

We were not first-strike on Iran. Remember they claimed the entire

Hormuz Strait, when about 10 miles of its width at its narrowest point are in international waters? Remember they are the world's most dedicated financial and ideological supporters of terrorism in the world. Those matters are aggression, my friend, not peace.

Contrary to the DSA, you are not compelled to read a bloody word of my 24 posts. but the DSA lies through their teeth. That would be obvious to a clear-headed mind.

What is democratic about an appointed president rather than one who is ewlectred by the people? About an abolished Senate. About anything in the platform of the

DSA

Why do you think they apply the term Demoicratic' to describe their alleged allegiance to Democracy? It's a deception of the first order, just as Satan told

Eve, "You shall not surely die,... blah, blah, blah.' DSWA is no more democratic than the RCP. Nothing in the DSA speaks to democracy; they merely occupy the claim to sound plausible.

No one goes to hell for committing the plethora of sins that plague humanity. The only sin that warrants Hell, itself, i.e., the kingdom that Satan operates [poorly] is the sin against the Holy Spirit, i.e., to deny that God the Father is the Father, and that Christ is his Son while in theiur physical presence. Very few of us will ever be in such a situation during our mortal lives. Any other sin can be forgiven by our prooer repentance.

This last post goes beyond the DSA's platform. This is a summary, only, so there is no blurb from DSA.

So, what is really accomplished by the "fight," the objectives of the DSA, if some workers become bosses?

Becoming, is, after all, the whole point of communism by the platform of the Democratic Socialists of America. Becoming... what? Do they truly, eventually, become bosses, as defined by the last words of their platform? Nope. In the end, what has changed?

"I'll tip my hat to the new Constitution,

Take a bow for the new revolution,

Smile and grin at the change all around.

Pick up my guitar and play,

Just like yesterday,

Then I'll get on my knees and pray

We don't get fooled again." 

"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Won't_Get_Fooled_Again

This communist version of "democracy" [positively the wrong word to compare to communism] has been around since Eden, my friends, not just 1848's Karl Marx. This was Satan's communist blurb. You know: power, pride, possession & pleasure. The original sins. And y'all thought it was just an apple? Well, it was seedless, wasn't it? Stayed in Eden, that tree did. Must have been a communist. That's why it did not reproduce. Just as communism does not, nor its soft-core socialism version. It all dies within a man's lifetime. But they try again and again, because they fail to learn philosopher Santayana's sage advice: learn from history, apply its lessons, avoid its traps, or we are doomed to repeat it.

DSA wants to defund the police forces of America. Did they know that one-third of the police forces are non-white: black, latino, asian, and other types? Yet, DSA claims even these must be defunded, because the whole of police forces are to be defunded, according to their own words. DSA must believe even those who are of the one-third of the police forces are, nevertheless, white supremacists. Why else would DSA want to defund them, too?

White supremacy is not the communists' problem. Racism is not their problem. Housing is not their problem. Education, voting, private enterprise, workers, and all their other complaints are not their problem. Their problem is simple. The politick they want to impose is a proven failure, and they just cannot face and dance to that music.

True democracy is the gift of heaven: eternal life. It has a life that is continuous, just as man and woman have been since Eden. Life on Earth is not merely generational with starts and stops. It, too, is endless. Even the ancient Egyptians knew this. Hence: "Spells for the Coming Forth by Day," as they titled it. We screwed up the title and the content, calling it, instead, "The Egyptian Book of the Dead." I've read the spells [about 250 printed pages] in their ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs. It's not about death. Dead has naught to do with life or democracy. This amateur Egyptologist knows that much. Bad title, bad interpretation. Just like communism, and the Democratic Socialists of America. So the Human Genome Project confirmed in 2003. Where y'all been since then? Stuck in a seedless apple skin? 

Every original word that is mine in this series is the truth as I am equipped to know and embrace it, where I have made claims of evidence. Once, 40 years ago or more, I was selected as the jury foreman in a criminal trial. Once selected, before the trial, we jurors were sworn to an oath by the trial judge. We were asked to swear to be attentive to the trial testimony and exhibits and to avoid bias in our deliberation to seek the truth. I swore, "I do" along with the other jurors. Then in the brief silence immediately following, I asked the judge, "Do you?" He looked at me and smiled. He said, as best I remember, "I take my own oath as a judge, and it is similar, not exactly like yours, but I've never been asked by a juror. Thank you. Yes, I do," he concluded. The trial proceeded, and we did our duty, as sworn. 

As I swear, now. I ask you, "Do you?"

Where is the Yoda Party? That party's platform is much shorter and perhaps more democratic than even the U.S. Constitution.

In The Empire Strikes Back, while training Luke on Dagobah, Yoda tells Luke that the Force connects all living energy and that physical size or limits do not matter.

Luke struggles to lift his sunken X-wing fighter from the swamp when challenged by Yoda to use the Force. Luke says, after trying, "I tried...I can't. It's too big," or words to that effect. Yoda tells him, "Try not. Do, or do not. There is no try." Then he said that size matters not and points out that his own physical size does not limit his power.

Yoda explains that the Force surrounds and binds all things. He contrasts our spiritual energy with our physical bodies to show that the mind and spirit are what connect to the Force, not muscle or physical weight, or any lack of the same. It is not mere belief. Those with an acquaintance with this exercise of mind and spirit know this power by another name: faith. No, not mere belief. That is nothing by comparison to faith, because belief makes no demands. Faith, the "Force," does.

Yoda says: "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter." Yoda is no communist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Empire_Strikes_Back

- End -

"Empower workers to come together and fight the boss. Protect, expand, and enforce the rights of all workers to form, join, and strike with their unions, regardless of industry. Support union members who organize reform caucuses, democratize their unions, and take political action." 

 - DSA https://program.dsausa.org/

So, is it democratic for an employee to fight the boss? What does that employer think in a current democratic society? He, too - or she - has a boss. Does that person, in turn, start an up-bound fight? And how far up the chain does that go? Perhaps it is wrong to consider this relationship to be naturally combative. It is a little cheeky to believe all "bosses" are autocrats. It is supposed that if one believes there are rights to "Protect, expand, and enforce the rights of all workers to form, join, and strike with their unions, regardless of industry..." it follows one should also have the right, in a true democracy, "regardless of industry," and if one chooses, to not "...form, join, and strike with their unions." 

If we really comply with the definition of democracy, that must be a factor relative to joining unions, or not. With a continued eligibility to choose, with acceptance of circumstances to that choice, one is then truly democratic. Does DSA disagree? Apparently, by this lengthy, convoluted platform, it seems they do disagree. Because, according to this fight, bosses cannot also be included in a "democracy," because only "workers" can "...organize reform caucuses, democratize their unions, and take political action."

Again, aren't bosses workers, too? When I was a boss, I spent more time with our team than at my desk. That was the last place I wanted to be. That way, I didn't have to have an "open-door policy," because, usually, there was no door, let alone a separate room.

"Establish public ownership of the largest corporations and essential industries to ensure democratic control and accountability to the people. Enact aggressive wealth taxes on the richest individuals and corporations to spend on public goods and infrastructure." - DSA https://program.dsausa.org/

By how many buzzwords is DSA going to define "democracy?" What's wrong with the following descriptive definitions of the United States of America?

“A Republic”, according to the Oxford English Dictionary [OED], “is a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.”

“A Democracy,” according to the same source, “is a political system that allows the citizens to participate in political decision-making, or to elect representatives to government bodies.”

These definitions fly in the face of whatever DSA believes is the definition of "Democracy." We do not pick and choose definitions of words on the whim of political divide. And since we are a "republic" by the definition of the word, that means we have a President, elected by the people, not by Congress, just as the definition demands. That DSA disagrees with this definition is entirely their choice of belief. We should not redefine a "Republic," nor a "Democracy," at the whim of political disagreement. That is called something else: chaos; the very word used by DSA in Part 5's first sentence. Do they now like this word, or is it a conundrum to them by lacking a choice? Choice is maintained as a touchstone of communism. Is it? If you believe it, I have a tropical island to sell you. Does that have relevance as a singular ±1.5º C fluctuating climate demanded by the DSA communists?

Please share how an economic drain, a.k.a. DSA Green New Deal, is a service to the public "to spend on public goods and infrastructure." The G.N.D. is a transfer of wealth, not a dedicated creation of wealth, such as our current free market economy is. The DSA platform is not a creator of wealth, but is a wealth drain. This is what GND - not always known as that, particularly in the realm of climate crisis names, let alone the "science." We've had "climate change," [1956] "global warming," [1988] back to "climate change" [2002], not to mention "Green New Deal" [2007]. The science and names have been chameleonic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change Consider, for example, that in 200 years of "climate science" [yes, it is that old, but compared to physics, or astronomy, it is a child] no one, as yet, has resolved lower Mississippi flooding, Midwest tornadoes, or fires in the San Gabriel Mountains of Los Angeles, such as Brentwood in 1961, when my family lost our home in a wildfire, and Pacific Palisades, next door to the West - last summer, and several others in between. So, yes, I am a personal victim of the failure of GND, and its previous names. My father took not one dime of government hand-out. It wasn't offered. FEMA did not exist for another 19 years. He was insured, however, but that payout was a pulling-teeth venture, even though "fire insurance" was one of the policy riders.

But let's reduce "Economic Democracy" to its basic terms. I have already offered my own economic basics: Ambition, Planning, Execution. Economy is a process. We perform processes with excellence and with ignorance. 

Ambition must start the process, and no one can embrace that attribute but by their own initiative. That's what ambition is: a personal attribute. It cannot succeed by groupthink. We think a team succeeds as a team. Yes, but behind that team are its individual players, each of whom, for personal success, must have sufficient personal ambition to succeed personally. Ambition cannot be an entitlement; it must be driven from within each heart and mind with individual effort.

Planning is simply goal-setting and critical path definition, with periodic review of where we each are currently, and what must be done, individually, to participate in the plan's success.

Execution is simply working the plan, achieving the individual interim goals each has committed to achieving on time and within budget. All interim goals achieved, the plan succeeds, and the result is economic personal growth, contributing to the corporation's total success. Every contributor knows what their individual contribution meant to themselves and the corporation. 

That is ownership at an individual level. 

Ownership of most of the current public corporations is already "established public ownership." When we have individually applied "ambition, planning, execution," we have educated ourselves sufficiently to participate in the stock market, in bonds, in precious metals, in a variety of investments that allow us personal ownership that communism does not know how to initiate, operate, or ameliorate a less-profitable condition. This is why communism must use other people's money; they do not know how to generate it for themselves.

This explains precisely why communism has never succeeded for even a continuous century anywhere in the world, any time in the world. Ever. A major problem has always been its failures in nomenclature, alone, regardless of what is meant, with and without dictionaries.

One has to ask: Why is DSA so shy to be ambitious, plan, and execute their own personal wealth, in favor of excessively taxing only the wealthy at aggressive rates compared to less performing members of society? DSA wants equity, but shies from equality. There is a difference.