Tuesday, March 30, 2010

UFC UFN 21 picks and thoughts

Wed night. Free on Spike Tv.

One of my favorite sayings, "Live and Free."

So here is the televised card:
http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/blog/cagewriter;_ylt=Av8yOJTGXgNdJC2xdmsoI009Eo14

Kenny Florian (156) vs. Takanori Gomi (155) 
Roy Nelson (263) vs. Stefan Struve (248)
Nate Quarry (186) vs. Jorge Rivera (186)
Ross Pearson (156) vs. Dennis Siver (156)



My picks to win are on the left side.


Here is the problem. Kenny flo flo is a top 155 fighter. But he has lost two shots at the belt. What can he do to get a third, and why would it turn out different? So now Kenny is the 155 version of Rich Franklin. Franklin was the second best fighter at 185. He beat everybody except lost both title shots against anderson the spider silva. Rich has moved up to 205. What can kenny do?


Roy Nelson better show that he can do more than lay on people and beat them by taking out their air. Like a big Jon Fitch, he might get a good win record with a bunch of fights of laying down and hugging out a decision.


Nate Quarry is the most interesting fighter in the pack. He could be great. He is really really close. I'd love to see him make that leap to top elite fighter.


Ross vs siver: I pick Ross but need to see more of both before I could even begin to care about these guys at the 155 class.


But Live and free, so what more do you want.

Monday, March 29, 2010

Walk Away from your Mortgage

I heard Terry Savage today on the radio. Terry is a well known financial advisor. Talking about the foreclosure and economic crisis in America, she, and other financial planners, refer to walking away from your house as a 'moral' decision the homeowner has to make.

Why don't they ask Donald Trump or any of the other large commercial real estate corporations if it is a moral issue when they walk away from upside down properties?

When a buisiness walks away from its obligations it has at least the same effect, if not more, on an area than if a single homeowner walks away from their mortgage.

If you are a homeowner who is upside down on your mortgage and struggling, Walk Away.

Your moral imperitive is to take care of your family and your financial health, not to your mortgage lender. They took a knowing risk when they made the mortgage. They made a business decision. The bank is not your freind or family. They just want your money. Don't pay your bills out of morality. Pay your bills if that is what is good for you. Act like the big dogs and if not paying your bills is better for you then walk away.


Sunday, March 28, 2010

Hung up on Jews

My friend asked me the other night, how do you respond to this: He had a friend over, a Polish Catholic girl. At the end, when they were talking for a bit, she asked him, "so why don't you Jews accept Christ as the savior?"


She didn't sound racist or mean spirited, my friend just didn't know what to say, so he asked me how I would respond.


I told him that just the other day a polish catholic co-worker of mine had asked me if it was true that some jews went their whole life without eating bacon, ever.


My response: why are you wondering about a couple of million Jews who don't eat bacon, what about the billion Muslims or the billion Hindu that don't eat bacon their whole life.


People are so hung up on what a few million Jews do or don't do, but they would never think it strange that a Muslim does not accept Christ as their savior or that a Hindu may never eat bacon.








UFC 111 Recap

Frank Mir was destroyed by Shane Carwin. Is this the end of Mir's ranking as a title contender?

GSP did not trip over himself and knock himself out, which was the only way he was going to lose.

The rest of the matches were mostly intense hugging. Wrestling might be the best base to win a MMA fight on decision, but I'd like to see some striking. Does Jon Fitch really think he will beat GSP by hugging him hard for five rounds? Few wrestlers develop the striking power of Carwin or Lesnar, most of them turn out to be like Fitch, great records but a yawn to watch.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

UFC 111

There are only two fights on tonight's card that I care about.

GSP vs Dan Hardy.

GSP may actually kill Dan Hardy. I think the Vegas line currently has GSP as a 10-1 favorite. I think they are just being nice on Hardy.

Frank Mir vs Shane Carwin. A close match-up. 2 big strong 265 lb. heavyweights. Mir has tighter striking and crazy good ju-jitsu. Carwin has more power in his strikes and stronger take-downs.

I pick Mir. He has more experience and has been in the cage with top top fighters. This will be Carwin's first fight with a top 5 world fighter.


The rest of the card is solid and evenly matched, guys like Jon Fitch are fighting. Fitch already lost to GSP and tonight's fight was going to be against Alves, another GSP victory. Both Fitch and Alves are close, they are almost almost great. And tonight's fight would have put one of them back in title contention for a rematch against GSP. Alves can't fight due to medical and is replaced by Ben Saunders, a good fighter but I think Fitch will use him up.


On another note: Dan Hardy has a Tibetian saying tattooed on his stomach. In the promos, UFC airbrushed out the tat because they don't want to piss off China, where they are trying to break into. On the off off off chance that GSP trips over his own feet and knocks himself out and Hardy wins, he should stand up there in the post fight interview and shout "Free Tibet!"

I don't care about Tibet too much, but I do care that the UFC airbrushed out his tat.

Friday, March 26, 2010

Jewish Question

I asked this in the comments section of a previous post: Hopefully I can get some answers.

If Jewishness passes from mother to child, because we may not know who is the actual dad, then why does tribal lineage, especially priesthood (kohaniim, leviim) pass down from father to son?

How do we know who is the dad?

What if the son is really the child of the gardner or milkman or neighbor or other?

If Jewishness passes down from the mother because we may not know who is the dad, how could we possibly expect that the tribal lineage passed down truthfully?

Racial Unity in Israel

Every country deals with racial issues.

In Israel, I am often shocked by how I hear people speak about Sephardiim, Jews who come from Middle Eastern/Spanish countries.

I feel that the Sephardiim have a more honest connection and link to the history of Judaism, after all, they stayed in the region of Israel and maintained a distinct cultural connection. This cultural connection is most visible in their food and in their dress.

The Ashkenazim, the Eastern European (aka polish ghetto/white) Jews, maintained their european cultural heritage. The food is based on European ghetto food and their dress is black suits and black coats and black hats, perfect for a cold Polish ghetto or Siberian exile.

And the Ashkenaziim have typically had the political and financial muscle and they grew up in the same racial atmosphere as their Gentile European brothers and used their muscle to discriminate against those darker, or less refined then those who hail from the European ghettos.

As a side note: Israelis today act like their country is located in the center of Europe and not on the edge of Africa. No way do white jews want to be in anyway associated with Africa or darkness.

But the truth that the Sephardiim have carried with them for almost 2000 years has been destroyed.

Here is a picture of one of the most renowned political leaders of the Sephardi movement: Eli Yisahi:

What does it mean to be sephardi if you adopt the culture of the ashkenaziim?

Or maybe he just wants power and has to play the game and dress the part of ashkenaziim, like a gay man who stays in the closet and runs for Republican political office.

Have the ashkenaziim won the racial issue? Is their culture so powerful that it has simply gobbled up the sephardiim?

The highest grossing resteraunt in Paris is McDonalds: and its not just from American tourists.






Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Man Plans and God Laughs

Disputed isle in Bay of Bengal disappears into sea

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100324/ap_on_sc/as_india_disappearing_island

NEW DELHI – For nearly 30 years, India and Bangladesh have argued over control of a tiny rock island in the Bay of Bengal. Now rising sea levels have resolved the dispute for them: the island's gone.


New Moore Island in the Sunderbans has been completely submerged, said oceanographer Sugata Hazra, a professor at Jadavpur University in Calcutta. Its disappearance has been confirmed by satellite imagery and sea patrols, he said.

----------------------------------------------------------

To quote the great simpsons philosopher Nelson: HA HA

or the dalai lama in his interview with Christine Amanpour: "it is all man's folly." We imagine that what we do has meaning.

Another Hand In My Pocket

I don't mind tipping. In fact, it feels nice to leave a generous tip for good service and a nice meal out. I know the staff make crap wages and if I am out enjoying a nice meal I feel good dropping an extra buck or two above the standard rate.

Recently I have seen a disturbing new trend: drive through tip jars.

Maybe its a sign of the times: we have such a bad economy that people who are doing nothing but handing me a cup of coffee through a little window are now expecting a tip.

God forbid I ask for napkins.

And for that attitude I need to tip?

I am offended that they would even put that out there and intentionally try to obligate me into tipping for nothing. I am supposed to tip simply because I have the cash to buy a cup of coffee in the morning?

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Kosher Cooking Tip

For those of you who keep kosher and have been replacing the butter with margarine, from now on use Earth Balance.

I use it and don't keep kosher, that's how good it is.

If you care it is also good for vegans and halal. The real issue though is taste, consistency, texture and health.

I use it as a replacement for butter in almost all my recipes nowadays, and kashrut is not an issue for me.

Here is there website: Check them out. http://www.earthbalancenatural.com/

Monday, March 22, 2010

Pre Pre Pre 1967 Borders for Israel

Courtesy of Wikipedia: the map on the left shows the kingdom of Judah, the kingdom of northern Israel, and her surrounding neighbors.

I came across this map while looking for where the word Jew came from:
Here is what Wikipedia had to say on the subject:   The Jewish ethnonym in Hebrew is יהודים Yehudim (plural of יהודי Yehudi) which is the origin of the English wordJew. The Hebrew name is derived from the region name Judah (Yehudah יהודה). Originally the name referred to the territory alloted to the tribe descended from Judah the fourth son of the patriarch Jacob (Numbers). Judah was one of the twelve sons of Jacob and one of the Twelve tribes of Israel(Genesis). The Genesis 29:35 [1]relates that Judah's mother — the matriarch Leah — named him Yehudah (i.e. "Judah") because she wanted to "praise God" for giving birth to so many sons: "She said, 'This time let me praise (odeh אודה) God (יהוה),' and named the child Judah (Yehudah יהודה)", thus combining "praise" and "God" into one new name. Thereafter Judah vouchsafes the Jewish monarchy, and the Israelite kings David and Solomon derive their lineage from Judah. After the splitting of the united Kingdom of Israel, the name was used for the southern kingdom of Judah, containing not only the land of the tribe of Judah but also that of Benjamin and Simeon. With the destruction of the northern kingdom of Israel, the kingdom of Judah became the sole Jewish state and the term y'hudi (יהודי) was applied to all Israelites. When the word makes its first appearance in writing (in the book of Esther) its meaning has already expanded to include converts to the Jewish religion as well as descendants of Israelites."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Essentially, there was a civil war among the Israelites. Each of the 12 tribes took sides and the Land of Israel was split in two: the cousins who joined together under Judah's banner ruled the south and the rest of the cousins banned together and formed the kingdom of Northern Israel. I think this might be like cousin Arabs/Muslims: some are Shia and some are Sunni and they fight over land and power.


The Jews who are left all come from the kingdom of Judah, hence the term Jew.


And since modern day Israel is based on the historical Israel, perhaps we should set the borders along the kingdom of Judah borders and defend those with a true ancient claim.


I am not sure what claim the kingdom of Judah has on the norther kingdom. When the northern kingdom was destroyed why would Judah have a claim on their cousin's territory? 


And from a religious perspective, God spared the kingdom of Judah, which is why we are Jews. God destroyed the northern kingdom, not at the hands of the Judeans, but by outside, gentile, forces. So the lands of the cousins of Judah was taken away, and those tribes destroyed. Why should the children of Judah fight for the northern kingdom? We should defend first and foremost, our ancient homeland, the Kingdom of Judah. 

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Women and Slaves Take Owner's Last Names, Chivalry is not dead

A conversation here : http://materialmaidel.blogspot.com/2010/03/offering-to-pay-on-date.html

got me thinking about why do women take the last name of their husbands.

Coincidentally, I was reading Simon Winchester's book, 'The River at the Center of the World,' where I came across this interesting fact: "the Moso - a people related to the Nakhi, who lived on the northern side of the Yangtze and whose practices are more rigorously  matriarchal than their country cousins. For instance, their family names pass down from mother to daughter."

So I hopped online and asked the great and wise Google, 'why do women take the last name of the husbands?"

Here is what Wiki-Answers had to say: "In earlier times, women were considered property, so they took on their "owners" last name. Slaves took on their owners' last names, too; that is why not many African Americans have African last names. 

Nowadays it is a choice to take on a husband's last name; some do it out of convention or tradition but it is not mandatory; some combine last names or even take on the wife's name (rare). Practices also vary in gay marriages."

Some other answers I found: Men lack the ability to change. or, women take everything else, why not the man's name too.


But as a Jewish question, Jewishness passes from mother to child. The reason for this matriarchal lineage descent is because while we may not always know who is the father, you always know who is the mother.

So specifically for Jews, wouldn't it make more sense for the man to take the woman's last name? 

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Freedom with the Lord

"I choose to believe that this is not a test." - Dr. Gregory House

This is not a test. Some people are under the impression that Atheism equals complete freedom to do whatever you want whenever you want. These people also assume that religion is a strict set of laws preventing one from doing whatever they want whenever they want. These people also indicate that doing whatever you want whenever you want must include, drugs, illegal sexual activity, murder, theft and other assorted sundry behaviors.

For example, often a supposedly religious person will tell me, 'well if you don't believe in god then why don't you do heroin or rape someone?"

As if everyone really wants to and it is only religion that prevents pedophilia and armed robbery.

The issue is not with atheism. Atheism demands that one accept this reality as your reality. This existence is not a test for some other reality.

But if you're religious than this world is only a test for the next. You can do anything, like kill an abortion doctor or assault policemen for arresting baby murderers and it is all covered by your version of god. And if your god doesn't permit that behavior you can always repent, either way, this reality is just an illusion.

Only with religion can you do what you want when you want how you want. Because with religion you don't really exist anyhow, you and your soul are like two separate beings. You can do what you want and your soul gets off almost scott free.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Israel P.R. Screwup

Here we are, a week after Israel announced they approved building 1600 housing units for Jews in East Jerusalem while Vice President Biden was visiting.

At first there was a sense of national pride. People in Israel felt good that they weren't anyone's friers (suckers). They showed those Americans. They stuck it to 'em.

And then the back-draft started. Israelis got a whiff of what pissing in the wind smells like when the white house began using the words like embarrassment and crisis. So the rationalizing and excuse making started: "it was just a technical error, no harm no foul."

And this is Israel's essential pr problem. They don't stick to a plan. Israel and her diplomats and academicians are regularly embarrassed and insulted. And what does Israel do? they issue pr that they invented the cherry tomato. Israel flip flops so often they end up looking like the gang that couldn't shoot straight. Pick a position and stick to it. And make it a position of power and danger. Would the white house declare it a crisis if china wiped out a village during a visit from a dignitary? When President Obama stated that he would meet with the Dali Lama China declared itself a victim and that this action would harm relations.

Israel is too needy to deal from a position of strength. And people make arguments of supposed facts and righteous behavior and expect that the world will care. The world cares about power, not field medical units.

So instead of either not making a declaration during a visit by the vice president, or making a declaration and sticking to it and declaring it an internal issue and not open to conversation, Israel has now suspended plans for building the units and begins a new round of negotiations from a position of weakness. 

Here's a life lesson: Don't tug on superman's cape.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Answering Big Jewish Life Questions

I came across this blog:


 
http://rogueregime.blogspot.com/2009/12/is-anyone-else-like-me-out-there.html#comments

He writes:

"I'm trying to find personal answers to some big questions:

  • How can a truly liberal person take seriously religion in general and Judaism in particular?
  • What is the meaning of Jewish community if I only cherry pick the elements of Judaism that "speak" to me personally? But once I surrender autonomy to some other authority -- God, Chazal, my rebbe -- then how can I stay liberal?
  • I cannot believe the Torah was dictated to Moses by God, and I simply can't accept that Oral Torah could be binding for all Jews for all time. But then how do I read and understand these texts? How am I to relate to them?"

These are good questions. These are questions which trouble many people as their religion conflicts with their senses.

I would like to propose some answers. I don't accept that there is a conflict between liberalism and religion. I think their is a conflict between living as a human and religion.

I have long thought that religion serves and has served a useful purpose in the world. But I do not believe in the concept of god and I don't think anyone else does either. A belief is all encompassing. If one believes that they should look both ways before crossing the street, they don't shut their eyes and jump into the road to test their belief. Similarly, if people actually believed in God, their behavior would reflect that truth. All too often it does not.

So why is/was religion important? For thousands of years people had no way of explaining the world. They understood some physical truths about the world and attempted, as do we all, to make sense of the world around them. Religion fulfilled that function. As people realized that incest causes a threat to survival of their little tribe, they banned incest. As people realized that eating uncured pork can threaten the survival of their little tribe, they banned pork. The people saw the results but not the causes. The language of science had not yet been invented. God made sense. Do not eat pork because god said so. How did he say so? by killing a bunch of people who ate bad pork. A leader needed to galvanize troops or people? God endowed the leader with special powers, like King David or Solomon, who are remembered not for their humanity, but for their special connection to God.

But this does not mean one has to reject their Judaism. One can accept that after thousands of years, a book and tribe developed. You can then decide what, if anything, from Judaism you wish to retain.

For example, Shabbat. The concept of a 7 day week has NO astronomical value. A 7 day week with a day for rest was, by current records, invented by the Mesopotamians (where Abraham came from) about 7000 yrs ago. They didn't have the science to explain why a day off was healthy for people and families, so they used the words 'God commanded' to guide people towards healthy behaviors or just the behaviors leaders wanted.

Does science have all the answers? not yet and maybe not ever. But science has provided enough answers to show that we no longer need to use the term god to fill in the blanks. If you went back to the middle ages and explained how a virus work they might kill you for sorcery, or they might promote you for sorcery. Now we know that viruses are real and sickness is not caused by an imbalance of humours.

How do you retain your Jewishness without accepting the Torah and Moses and all the rest? You read the books as histories, as tales and fables intermingled with histories and laws. You read the books as the development of your tribe, your family.

Does everyone in your family need to think and feel and behave the same for you to love them and still feel connected as family?

So you look at the book and say, I am so thankful I don't live in an era where genocide is commanded by god and women who are raped are sent off to marry their rapist. Those laws and events made sense at the time, but I like medicine and hotels and television. I like having a family day once a week. I like celebrating holidays with my family, celebrating the history and development of my large extended family. But I can reject all that offends my sensibilities because it is not truth. The books contain truths, but each truth is individualized.

Enough for now. Its a beautiful day. Enjoy.

 

 

Monday, March 15, 2010

Ed Schultz & Michael Medved: Can America survive them?

I have come to despise political talk radio. Examples from the left and right.

Ed Schultz is a radio and television left wing talker. He is rah rah pro-Obama. When President Obama wanted to bail out the auto industry I called Ed Schultz on his radio show.

The auto safety report had just been released. Chrysler Auto did not make the top ten list; not one of their vehicles. I called Ed and started to say that maybe we don't need as large a bailout package. he challenged me: "why do you want to kill the auto industry? Why are you on the "right" so opposed to union labor? etc..."

(one of the few times I've been accused of being a righty.)

I argued that maybe the government should only bail out Ford and GM and let the smallest and worst managed fend for itself. I argued that if Chrysler couldn't make a safe vehicle than why spend the money bailing them out.

And you know what Big Ed said? He said, "when I go shopping for a vehicle I'm not thinking about safety."

What a dishonest intellectual fraud.

And here we are now. Chrysler is now foreign owned. GM has laid off about 50% of their workforce despite the bailout. And Ford refused the bailout money and is burning up the track.

Now for Michael Medved; another fraud.

Medved is a standard right wing talker. He portrays himself as just right of center but he is pro-right and anti-left and gives a nice spiel on the benefits of the judeo-christian ethos.

He ends his radio segments with the catchphrase, "...with this, the greatest nation [the USA], on God's green earth."

I heard him argue with a caller the other day that he uses "greatest" not that America is better than every other country, but that it is the most influential. The USA has the largest economy, he argued, and has the most immigration and the largest army etc.. and therefore is the greatest by virtue of her influence on the global sphere.

Except that he is a smart guy. Medved has written numerous books. He writes for newspapers and magazines. Words are his stock and trade. He purposefully uses the word greatest because he is so smart and knows that one of the dictionary definitions of great is large. Ooooh, i'm so impressed by his ability to use a dictionary. He uses the word greatest because it means what people think it means, the best.

Like american teenagers who say fag and then look at you and say, "but in England it means a bundle of sticks." or idiots who insist that the word niggardly can be used without racial connotations.

With intellectual frauds like these on the left and right what hope is there for America's future?

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Who is Really against Healthcare Reform?

People who have great health insurance and people who don't need healthcare.

But everybody is against bad government healthcare reform.

We've heard the statistics: over 50% of all bankruptcies are caused by medical expenses, 50some thousand people a year die from insufficient coverage, 17% of GDP.

and we've heard the stories, the under insured or uninsured: the old lady who had to take the bus home and reschedule her chemo because she forgot her HMO referral form, the people who skip their pills because the costs are too high.

Why would bad government healthcare be the solution?

There are good systems out there in the world. Yes there is room for improvement but those systems are significantly better than what most people have access to in the USA.

Yes, America has the best healthcare and hospitals and doctors in the world. Absolutely. No question or debate. But how many people can afford that healthcare and those hospitals and doctors? And for how long?

Until the politicians get serious and adopt an existing healthcare system without all the extra political manipulations added on, the people who have great healthcare will keep on preventing change, and rightly so.

Those who can afford great coverage will still have great coverage under a good healthcare program. But a reform bill that fails is no good to anybody.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Victory in Iraq and other little hypocrisies

Joe Biden recently declared that "the victory in Iraq may be this administration's crowning achievement."


Obama has often times rationalized his failure to turn around the economy as the result of Bush's terrible economic policies (which he continued with tart and stimulus). He blames Bush for America still being in terrible times economically.

The right wing claim that victory in Iraq is the result of Bush's policies and Obama is just there to clean up and take credit. They blame Obama for the economy as he is president and he owns the economy and his policies and has had more than enough time to put his own stamp on the economy.

In the last years of Bush's term the right wing was still blaming Clinton for all sorts of problems but taking credit where they could.

Did we really win in Iraq? When is the parade?

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Marriage, Civil Unions, Ghetto Nostalgia and Zealisim

A few posts down, when I wrote about why terrorism works on liberals, I touched on the conservative's intellectual falseness in their desire to retain a glorified version of a non-existent past.

A young zealistic (note: made up word meaning: one who is driven by zeal and the ideal is merely secondary to the opportunity to be zealous.) Rabbi once told me how he yearned to live in the Ghetto like his grandparents and generations before. He was jealous of their simple peasant lives. He wanted the community and family closeness that comes from huddling together for warmth. I had to assume that this vision of the ghetto was under the condition that their were no Nazis, no pogroms, no specific anti-Jewish laws. I also assume that his vision of the ghetto included: antibiotics, toilet paper, plumbing, rights as citizens of the state. I thought it might be rude to ask and challenge his implanted memory.

The conservatives have the same problem that afflicted that Rabbi, they refuse to accept the past as a whole human reality. There is nothing traditional about marriage. In the world of today and the past, there are and always were, a wide range of what constitutes marriage from culture to culture and time to time.

In a free society, where change is recognized as unstoppable and ever present, there is no reason to limit any groups wishes based on the concept of what is traditional. Traditional does not exist. Tradition is a fiction of the mind.

The honest solution for a free government is to offer civil unions to any group of two or more consenting adults.

If people wish for marriage they can go to their respective religious/cultural organization and receive their version of marriage. When married, they would automatically also receive a civil union certificate.

The government should not be in the business of retaining specific groups versions of what is traditional.

Same-sex couples in D.C. set to say 'I do'

Washington (CNN) -- Dozens of same-sex couples plan to marry in the District of Columbia on Tuesday, the first day that such unions will be legal in the nation's capital.

The new law survived a Supreme Court challenge last week, when the measure went into effect, but couples had to hold off until Tuesday because of a three-day waiting period.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/09/same.sex.marriages/?hpt=T2



I am in favor of equal rights for all groups.

I am especially pleased that news like this is no longer big news. There was a time, not too long ago, where any attempt to legalize or normalize homosexual rights within society was met with a swift and powerful backlash.
Now, this news doesn't even make the front page.

In my opinion it shows the success of the equal rights movement and the growing acceptance of equal rights.

Although, as a friend once told me, "there's no such thing as rights. Rights are a figment of our imagination. A right is that which cannot be taken away from you. Tell me waht 'right' you have that cannot be taken away."

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Free stuff for your birthday

The internet is amazing. Its easy enough to pass these on. Enjoy.

http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/108990/the-best-birthday-freebies

Why Terrorism Works on Liberals

Sun Tzu, 2000+ years ago, wrote "one man willing to die can inflict terror on a thousand."

So terrorism is nothing new, or as King Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun."

Liberalism's ideals typically are presented as emotional arguments: people need health care, people need, people deserve, the rich have, equality, equanimity.

And conversely, Conservative views are typically presented as overly dry and unfeeling, a desire to relive a glorified past that never actually existed.

Terrorism works on Liberals because it affects them emotionally. Humans have instincts. We have the instinct for survival. Our instinct drives us to form social groups and norms. Living in a group increases one's chance of survival. One of our most cherished social norms is that we don't kill other civilians.

A suicide bomber goes against the instinct for survival and our social compact. The act of terrorism is a deeply traumatic and powerfully emotional act.

A liberal, who has trained their mind to filter all events and decisions through the logic of emotional need, responds to powerful events with agreement.

People cry that they need and the liberal agrees and attempts to pass laws to give.
People cry that they need and the conservative says, maybe, and reviews the data and how it affects the whole group and their rarefied view of the fake past.

A liberal sees an act of terror and Feels that if someone is committed to such drastic action, then they must deserve to succeed. Or at the very least, such a counterintuitive act, such a powerful act as terror, demands that their cause be somewhat just and worth deep consideration.

Sympathy is not a major natural instinct of the individual. Sympathy is a social norm. So the liberal is not affected by the suffering of the victim, rather the liberal is only affected by the emotionally charged act of counter-instinctive violence.

Liberalism that continues to be based upon reactions to emotional needs is the luxury of selfish needy minds and ultimately ends in disaster for everyone who is unlucky enough to be touched by its members.

Saturday, March 6, 2010

CNN'S Amanpour and Pro Palestinian Bias

A few nights ago I watched Christiane Amanpour, of CNN, interview Mosab Hassan Yousef, son of a Hamas founder. Mosab recently revealed that he worked as an agent for Israel's Shin Bet security service. 


He told Amanpour that he was against hate and for love and that he worked as an agent, "to save lives."  


Amanpour pressed the issue and asked, "yes, but how did it save Palestinian lives?" 


Was she implying that one only attempts to stop a suicide bombing on a bus-load of civilians if they are your own group? Would she have asked a double agent of the USA, "how did it save Afghani lives?" I doubt that. But if someone helps a bus-load of Jews not get blown up, it would only make sense if it somehow only saved the Jews as a byproduct of helping his own people.





U.S. Armenia Genocide Vote

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1154423.html

The article begins : "Jewish lobbyists contrived a U.S. congressional vote that labeled the World War One-era massacre of Armenians by Turkish forces as genocide, a London-based Arabic-language newspaper claimed on Saturday"


and ends with: "Turkey, a Muslim secular democracy that plays a vital role for U.S. interests from Iraq to Iran and in Afghanistan and the Middle East, accepts that many Armenians were killed by Ottoman forces but denies that up to 1.5 million died and that it amounted to genocide - a term employed by many Western historians and some foreign parliaments. 

Turkey regards such accusations as an affront to its national honor. "


This struck me as worth noting.




Thursday, March 4, 2010

Strikeforce gets sloppy seconds

http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news;_ylt=AiKcPfur0I0SNA1yqjEzK7s9Eo14?slug=ys-mmaweek030210&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Arlovski, former UFC Champ, signed with Strikforce.

The headline does not reveal the true story here: With the exception of Dan Henderson, Strikeforce has signed "former" champs of the UFC who were dropped from UFC because they had no shot at reclaiming their belt.

So they get a bunch of castoffs and throwaways and want people to think that they are in the same league as the UFC.

Dana White said it right when he called them StrikeFarce.

And I am even loosing faith in the one great heavyweight Strikeforce has: Fedor.

The "Last Emperor" is still a brilliant fighter. But his last few fights were: Brett Rodgers, Arlovski, Sylvia.

Brock Lesnar, the UFC heavyweight champ, would have destroyed those guys. If those three were in the UFC today none of them would be in title contention. Maybe Rodgers will be in a year or so, like cain velasquez in the UFC, if he doesn't get the yips first.

Strikeforce might have a good plan: get some names and build a name while developing a pool of talent. But in the meantime Fedor is getting older and tick tick tick and Fedor will never be truly the greatest heavyweight mma fighter of all time under the Strikeforce label.

Lets see Fedor and Lesnar, Fedor and Mir, Fedor and Coture. Instead we get Fedor vs. leftovers. How tragic for mma fans everywhere.

Monday, March 1, 2010

The 11th Commandment: Let There be Profit

Israel may let sponsors beam messages onto Western Wall


"After thousands of years of just being there, the Western Wall will finally be able to fulfill its commercial potential," King said. "The religious and spiritual center of the Jewish people should reflect Jewish heritage - and thus be dedicated to bringing in a healthy profit.


http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1152770.html


This reminds me of the story by James Morrow, where ads were laser beamed onto the giant skull of God's corpse.

But imagine if a non-Jew had said that the Jewish heritage is dedicated to bringing a healthy profit. Its enough to make you laugh and cry.

kosher question challenge

Helllooooo? I know there are Jews out there reading this blog. Whoever heard of Jews not answering a kosher question. No one has an answer for me?

I'm disappointed. All those rules and all that studying and you guys can't answer a simple question about kashrut.

If I wrote about a Rabbi molesting kids I'd get all sort of writers defending and admonishing, but a question about food that is eaten every sabbath and everyone goes mum.

Scroll down to my Kosher question post. I expect someone has an answer. if not, than why bother keeping kosher if you can't answer a basic question.