ParanoiA

I second that Rev. Quite a respected and admirable man. I'm kind of shocked, I really didn't expect to be discussing his passing for another 30 years. I don't think I'm out of line in saying american politics will suffer from this. In terms of journalism, he was the real McCoy. What in the world are they going to do this Sunday? Perhaps they'll run some kind of tribute?

Probably. But now we have Linden whining and questioning herself endlessly...I'm ready for Tom to come back. The Gap is fairly brutal in comparison though. The majority of the significant characters are heavily flawed, criminal types. If you had any difficulty getting past Lena's rape, don't even bother. Angus makes Thomas look like a saint.

That would likely explain the present exigency then. Yeah, my weekends are pretty full too. But thanks for taking the time to share. I think I can follow this a little better now. Sci-fi just turns me off, generally, since I'm never sure if an author is going for a more hard-science theme (as I'd prefer), or a Star Wars approach. I'm not sure, but it seems like Donaldson might be leaning toward a hard-science direction. I have no way of really knowing.

That's true, but 1) that doesn't fix the present scenario with Iraq and cease-fire violations, blatant acts of war answered with appeasement and beaurocracy. 2) we'd have to redefine our investment in the organization. At this point, it should be clear that I'm never going to sign on to my government forcing me to contribute funds for altruism. However, a certain amount of diplomatic altruism is certainly necessary and justified, so I'd like to see us revisit this, as a country, and then reconcile our membership. If we are instrumental in change, again, I'd rather that be purely because we merit being followed, not because we forced everyone to see it our way because we contribute 20% to the UN budget and we got the military resources they need. The media failed because he didn't lie. The rhetoric polarized the masses and so the disingenuous method of intelligence gathering (like ording an assessment report in 2 weeks that generally requires a year or more) went essentially unchallenged by the base. It's what happens when your partisanship causes you to oversell your accusations. If a guy steals a donut and you tell everyone he robbed the store, don't be surprised if people take his side over it. Are you kidding? We're going to stay the superpower forever and ever and ever and ever.... Seriously though, you may be right that we will want a strong UN and I think we also won't want the legacy of the bully state to answer to either. Our influence on the UN should be by impression rather than coersion. We will always be criticized one way or another, but I'd like to put an end to our coersive military persona. The UN deserves a humbled prestige. It's the only game in town, and monopolies aren't good for anybody. Maybe you don't agree with my approach to withhold membership pending merit rather than to help to compell merit. It's a decent point. Perhaps I should give it more thought.

Not challenging your review here really, but didn't the framers have issues with standing armies? I was thinking that was something Madison flipped on during his presidency - the whole war and financing issue with a weak federal government. I don't recall any details though.

Interesting. What would be the advantage to having an outer and inner haul over just one haul? From the way the book reads it sounds like what you're describing here. They actually have a situation where internal spin is being threatened - some bit about inertia - causing the whole craft to spin which jeopardizes navigation through debris.

Ah, I see. That makes a little more sense I guess. At least now I have a clue of what he's trying to say. Thanks. Probably. I've heard there are a couple of known subtle physics blunders in this series, apparently upset Donaldson since he paid an 'expert' to guide him. He doesn't normally write sci-fi. Maybe this is one of them.

I don't actually read much sci-fi. But I'm reading the The Gap series and Donaldson continually refers to "tach" and "tard". I have no earthly idea what these are supposed to mean, and he offers no definition, so I'm guessing I'm supposed to know this already. Anyone have any ideas on what tach and tard are supposed to be? Here's an exerpt for some context: In addition, the interaction of those elements was ruled by the gap drive's hysteresis transducer, which controlled the extent to which the drive's effect lagged behind its cause: too much lag, and the ship never went into tach; too little, and the ship never resumed tard. As a result, tiny fluctuations in power or hysteresis, or minute miscalculations of mass, became large shortfalls or overshots. While we're at it... What's this business about internal spin? Donaldson actually makes a distinction between internal spin, and the danger of losing it resulting in the entire ship spinning. Sounds like a cylinder within a spinning cylinder, which I'm assuming would simulate gravity, although I'm not sure I understand how. I thought you had to be standing on the object spinning in order to be effected by its spin. None of this is really important to the story, but I just wanted to know. Geewiz kinda stuff.

Rev, I'm trimming down the number of quotes I'm replying to as some of this stuff we're still progressing and some of it we're not. If I leave something out you want to pursue, feel free to bring it back. If that's true, then I'll certainly back off from my finger pointing. But I have a feeling this would go entirely differently if we were talking about GWB and his son being involved in a corruption scandel. I don't think anyone would give GWB the same fair shake you appear to have given Kofi. I still think the US has legitimate, well at least rhetorical reasons not to trust or deal with Kofi on the level. They are clearly in contention, the US, again, being the bad guy.

Enlightenment commenced.... The reason they haven't taken off is because market demand has not been there to drive it. It's been there just enough to poke it along. Solar is expensive. Electric car particulars are sobering, and really don't address the carbon output anyway, although I guess it would at least consolidate the source. Hydrogen cars aren't available, at least not by any affordable means, nor practical. Corn energy is just stupid. So far oil has outperformed these alternative fuels due to its cost and established infrastructure. It's just cheaper. We all want to do the right thing but we also need to eat. Humans are going to choose the most practical option for energy and oil is quite simply it. I understand the impulse to indict someone as the "bad guy" and pretend as if you're absolved from responsibility for this predicament. They put the product on the shelf, and you bought it. I said we're all to blame - including the oil companies. I also think it's more than just ridiculous to expect them to do anything other than ensuring the survival of their market. You're basically blaming a dog for eating bologna off the floor, while trying to train him to purr. Anyway, the positive side is that I think that market demand has arrived. 4 dollars a gallon seems to be a magic number for getting people to say "WTF?" I'm so ready for alternative fuels. I'm so done with oil. I'm now just waiting on capitalism to do its thing here.

Ok, I normally don't participate in these kinds of things, but... 1. iNow 2. Lucaspa 3. Pioneer 4. doG 5. 6. It leaves out those members that possess nicely balanced mixes of these attributes. CDarwin is a great example of someone who's knowledgable, considerate, good debating skills and a must read. iNow possesses the humility necessary to grow intellectually, is helpful, funny and always improving. The specialists are trumping the generalists. And we know that ain't how it goes...

I wonder if the "United States" was a conspiracy theory first... Tha's ok, this topic gets to me too. I'll bet you haven't been enlightened to the particulars of this campaign though. This is the first part of a one part plan sitting on GWB's desk: Certain members of congress (Builderburg members) are currently drafting legislation to compell mexican illegal immigrants to military service along the border. Once the force is large enough, the government (republicans) is to manufacture a reason for conflict to justify an invasion and occupation using those mexican forces. Keep your eyes peeled Carol. It's going to get nasty. And no one is going to believe us.

I see them. What's bad about it? What? You don't see them? You must look veeerry carefully...

The North American Union is a theoretical idea, not a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories exist as well, but the idea itself is not a conspiracy. Ron Paul stated this very clearly in the republican debates on at least two occassions that I can think of. Both times he said he didn't believe in any conspiracy theories about it or 9/11 - that the north american union was merely a concept that many would like to see happen. The kooks and nuts like Paul because he's an essential libertarian and because Alex Jones likes Paul because he's an essential libertarian. Before there was a European Union there was talk about a European Union. I'm sure the idea came long before any mechanics were set in motion. The NAU is the same thing, only we got the loony Alex Jones's out there reporting from motel rooms being watched by guys talking into their shirts. Poor people do this too, it's called Bingo. I know I would deny ever being there...

As to the OP, I think it's a lack of faith in the necessity that will drive the inventions we want. In other words, just hold on for bit, the need that will drive alternative fuels is arriving, being unloaded right now onto the american psyche. Peak oil, war for oil, high priced oil, blah blah blah - this is the stuff that drives the alternative fuel market. We're all guilty. Man discovered oil and the combustion engine and then just went off on a tangent of industrialization. We bitch about corporations that do this and that - the same corps our grand parents worked for - the corps that paid for our parents upbringing and fancy schoolin'. We bought the cars, the lawnmowers, the plastics, the asphalt - we loved it, and still do. The business of oil is unfortunate since we discovered the damaging effects long after the infrastructure for it was built and cemented in place. And now we're going to point at them and act like it's their fault? Or pretend as if they're not like every other business in the world in not seeking its own end? Oil guys aren't into alternative fuels because they're into oil. Just like M&M's isn't investing in steak burgers. It's just not their bag. But it is somebody's bag, and I'm hearing more and more alternative this and that everyday. Look at the ThinkCity (or is it CityThink?) Car. I'm seeing more media on the subject, everyday conversation, forum threads, newspaper articles and etc. Relax, it's coming. Well don't relax too much, intensity is good. But the idea of man killing himself is a bit too poetic for me. I've heard this since I was a toddler about everything from food to nuclear war. Man isn't going anywhere people - no matter how much you don't like him.

That's a dismissal. When the UN decides that 9 acts of aggression by a proven aggressor in the midst of a cease-fire isn't grounds for action, then they are not a legitimate world authority. Period. Their authority is grounds for suspicion and judgement. Good intentions do not equal good results. Yep' date=' all true. They were doing the same thing you're doing - oversimplifying a threat, dismissing acts of war by a thug still technically at war with a cease-fire agreement that's apparently not worth the paper it's written on. The UN failed to stop the US from illegally launching a war too. Where's the sanctions on us? Where's the UN resolution to remove us from Iraq? The UN lacks the tools and the resolve to fulfill its mission statement. That's a problem. And the US reacted to that problem like a petulant child with loaded weapons. Well, in your opinion anyway. We get the same kind of thinking here with reform and welfare - the right's idea of reforms is to let babies starve, old people to eat dog food, families living in the gutter downtown, that sort of BS. The UN has been on the right's hit list for a long time. Kofi Annan leading some charge to clean up corruption in the UN would be like charging Bush to clean up corruption in the US. No, you're selectively reviewing history here through the lenses of someone who doesn't have any issues with Kofi and the Oil for Food swindle. Sorry, I'm going to point my finger at him just like Bush jr. Both of them seem to be bought and paid for, but I think Kofi might have profited more from it, or at least his son. Yes' date=' and that's the reputation I'd like to squash. We've been using WWII as an excuse to get in everyone's business. We've also been using War Resolutions to absolve congress from responsibility for these conflicts, undermining the constitutional requirement to declare war, to obligate resolution and commit to a goal. War resolutions allow you to define victory in multiple ways - none of which have to even resemble victory. Of all the things that contribute to interventionism, this is arguably the worst. Oh sure there's common ground, and there as much chance you of convincing them as them convincing you. Ask yourself, how hard you are to persuade. It shouldn't be any surprise to expect the same from them. Your thoughts and philosophy comes from years and years of conditioning. To reverse that is working against nature. That's a big job. Can't expect people to drop their life's ideological disposition easily. And yes, people will rationalize around any fact to the contrary, it's instinctive. Changing people's minds is extremely difficult, time consuming. Mostly fruitless, infinitely thankless, but definitely worth it. Oh, yeah, I certainly agree. Rev hasn't just stood up, but has also carefully explained himself with class and wisdom. I don't think Rev's as biased as I first thought he was. He seems perfectly willing the spread the blame, even though the US receives the bulk of it. Ultimately, though, we're philosophically worlds apart. I just don't believe in responsibility in power routine. I don't believe we should lead any pack, but rather just be followed. There's a subtle difference there. Leading suggests self promotion. Being followed suggests merit. I'd rather our country lead by example, and spread democracy and freedom by impression.

I'm an idiot. I thought you were using diminutive like 'belittle' or something, without seeing the obvious. That's worse than looking for your glasses when they're still on your head.

Oh, we're saying the same thing then, I think. We both agree that the right wing message is not to trust ivory tower book worms. And yes, it has worked. Because people like to think their ideas are worthy and can engage, even when they haven't given it much thought at all. But do we agree it's not taught in academia to concede to ivory tower intellectuals? A subtle difference, but distinctive.

I actually wondered about Condi myself. Wouldn't that be an interesting VP option for McCain? Let's hear the diminutive name though.

The nice thing about electronic music is it allows composition for those not so inclined to instrumentation. It's funny too, because I know some really talented musicians that just can't get MIDI. They can shred on bass or guitar, but mapping soft synths is next to impossible for them. And you'd be surprised at the amazing sounds and glorious composition skills some amatures possess, despite having virtually no talent for traditional instruments.

I completely agree. I wonder if that will trickle away once we finally have a woman pres, a black woman pres, a black man pres, a latino man pres, a latino woman pres....you get the idea. So maybe in, like, 2108 we will have finally had about one of each flavor and can finally move on from that silly shit.

Allow me to split hairs even further. We do not currently have a Congress that is working for the people, but one that is working irreverent to the people - and yes we need to take it back.

I don't either. But, I can see how being extreme left or right could make it more difficult to be nonpartisan. Not saying Obama is one way or the other, just saying that if that's true, then it may suggest some potential hardship down the road. I think we are moving into a different, and better era of politics. I'm just not sure how long it's going to last. It almost seems as if when we get ourselves in a pickle, we come together better, and once we get out of it, then we go back to pushing our respective agendas irreverently. Maybe that's a fairly human thing to expect. I definitely believe their successes are part of the cause - well, at least compliments the seeming demand for broader change. I don't think it's tactics, although I don't know much about Obama to be credible. I like what you said about McCain inheriting the Iraq war. That's exactly what I got out of his disposition anyway. I know McCain won't, but I'm curious how quickly Obama could get us out of Iraq. I have a feeling it's going to be just like the democratic house elections, after all the promises, at the end of the day we're not leaving for years and years.

No, I reject the notion that we bear any more responsibility than any other nation. We're not your parents by merit, despite what the conservatives believe. And you're right, you don't get to demand that others follow laws while you don't - equally, that authority doesn't get to cherry pick which laws it's going to enforce. All or nothing baby. Withdrawing from the UN would be the first step to reclaiming our sovereignty and begin the process of both recasting the US as a nation that does not police the world and will require alliances be based on merit. The UN would have to prove its worthiness. There are good things the UN does that we don't hear about everyday. I think it's good if we be a part of that, but not at the expense of ineffective security and corruption. Not nearly as prolific nor as pretentious. I've never heard a right wing star "go off" on lefties as if none of them were in the room. We're probably going to have to agree to disagree on this one too. And you can drop the Limbaugh / O'reilly comments since my first and only reference to them was my negative opinion of them. That suggests you're more concerned with scoring emotional points rather than logical ones by misrepresenting my allegiances. Those commentators deliver the Republican message. They lay the base for the subtext of the speeches the politicians make. Trying to separate the two amounts to pedantry. That's got squat to do with my statements. The commentators are delivering the republican message' date=' which is that pointy headed geeks don't understand international affiars, and shouldn't be listened to. That lays the base for the subtext of the speeches the politicians make, as you put it. No separation exercised. What point do you think you're making here? Wrong, we learned most of these things centuries ago. There's a reason they say history repeats itself. Stop making excuses to rape the prostitute, as you said above. You're doing that hypocritical thing again, where you accuse others of the same actions you're guilty of. Your post here implicitly endorses the dismissal of their concerns by essentially replying that you've already tried showing them the correct answer and that didn't work, so now you're resorting to partisanship. Yeah, way to lead by example. That's just what our country needs isn't it? The same ole shit we've been doing since I was born. Finger pointing and circle jerking. All this is great stuff for your writing job, but don't sluff this off like even handed critical analysis. Writer's style often can't be bothered with such things.

Clever...but corny.