November 07, 2006
Treeman
Another fun sight at the
Carolina Renaissance Festival is the tree man. As you can see from the picture, he's, well, as tall as a tree. He can walk around a little bit. And he doesn't talk much -- after all, he IS a tree.

(click to enlarge)
Fun stuff, I'm telling you!
Previously:
Magician
Dextre Tripp
Jewels of the Caravan
Blackenshear the Curious
The London Broil
Dextre Tripp
Posted by: Ogre at
07:01 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.
1
aw that sure is one kewl tree dude!..when is it "leaving"?..LOL..corny corny!
Posted by: Angel at November 07, 2006 08:46 PM (qo/NM)
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2006 09:58 PM (GPb4I)
3
I loved the tree guy. He freaks people out when he walks one way and then goes back the same direction but not turning around in the process. Just sitting around and watching him and his reactions is worth sometime away from your life.
Posted by: Arbitratorofall at November 08, 2006 12:09 AM (5+Jvh)
4
And people just don't know to think when they see him. The sort of look, then try to decide if they should talk to him...
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2006 12:11 AM (GPb4I)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Why Freedom is Lost Today
Yes, I shall indeed be voting today, despite having
no good reason to vote. And for those who are interested, there will be plenty of better and more comprehensive coverage of the election today than the Ogre can provide (because some of us have to work for a living).
Instead, today, I'd like to pre-empt all regular programming for this essay about freedom. Other than the afternoon's Renaissance Festival review post, there will be no other posts here today. Instead, feel free to read and digest this single short post about freedom.
Freedom, to many people, is a relative concept. Personally, I like freedom. I like freedom a lot. I am willing to, and have, put my life on the line just for this strange concept of freedom. But true freedom is gone from this world, and it is highly unlikely to ever return.
Now certainly, you'd get no argument from me that The United States of America is the freest country in the world. Of that I have no doubt. After all, there's a reason those refugees keep coming here from nearly every country in the world. But yet I maintain we are not free. We may be more free than anyone else, but we're still nowhere near free.
To some, this is rather obvious. If you doubt that you are free, I challenge you to make it through one single day without either asking government for permission to do something or paying them a tribute. Go ahead, give it a shot. If you're thinking you'd just go out camping in your backyard, that won't work because you've got to pay taxes on that yard or the government will take it. I submit that there is literally nothing that can be done today without asking government permission or paying a government fee.
But that's not what this post is about. If you disagree that our freedoms are limited in America, there's not much point in your reading much further. The rest of this post assumes that you agree that government causes us to not be as free as we could be.
My problem is that not only are we not free, but I find it highly unlikely that ever again, as long as this current society reigns, will there ever be any chance for actual freedom in the world today. Why? Because freedom isn't nice.
Now freedom isn't mean, either. In fact, freedom is completely neutral when it comes to feelings and emotions. It is, however, good, just as the absence of freedom is evil. But our society, both in America and around the world, simply cannot handle, and cannot deal with anything that's "not nice."
Freedom requires responsibility. Freedom says that you reap what you sow. Freedom say that nothing is free. And that's just not nice. That's not compassionate. "For the Children" has been the rallying cry for the anti-freedom population for decades -- and it still works every single time.
In recent years, many have quoted Ben Franklin, who said something to the effect of "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." While that is true, we have moved far beyond that state today. We are not giving up liberty for safety, we are giving up freedom for compassion -- and our society has become so compassionate, we are simply not willing to give that freedom back.
For example, if there is a starving child in the street, what should be done about it? In a truly free country, a free society, any single person or organization would be completely free to help that child however they see fit. However, in today's compassionate society, that is not what happens. Instead, those who work are punished, fined, and jailed if they do not pay that fine; so that this poor child may have food. The child has to do literally nothing to obtain that food. Now, would freedom have allowed that child to starve? In a word, yes. Freedom would allow people to make bad choices -- and those bad choices could, and indeed often would, result in death.
So is freedom bad for allowing death? No, freedom is freedom because it allows people to choose the options that lead to death. If you are prevented from being allowed to make that choice, you are no longer free.
Now our society has taken that example above and expanded it beyond what the founders of our country could ever have believed. Do you know that there are now 3 generations of people who live in a house where not a single person in the entire family has ever worked a day in their life? How is that possible? Simple: by taking freedom away from others and giving cash to those who do not work to reward them for not working. In a truly free society, what would happen to those who do not work -- either by choice or because they are unable?
In previous decades, those who could not work due to physical maladies would be cared for by their families, by the churches, or at private hospitals (usually run by churches). They may not have lived a luxurious life, but live they did, due to the voluntary works of the individuals who wished to sacrifice, because they had freedom and the ability to do so. Those who would not work would perhaps be taken care of by the same entities, but with freedom, that very same entity had the freedom and option to decide that they would no longer support a person who refused to work. Most often in that case, the person who refused to work would either be forced to work, or they would simply die. That's not compassionate, but that's freedom.
I could outline various other cases and example wherein freedom would allow people to die. Once again, part of being free means to take responsibility for your actions, and being free to make the wrong choice that might result in your own personal injury or even in your death. Freedom is not safe. Freedom is not friendly and compassionate. Freedom is, however, free.
As a society today, again across America and the world, we are no longer capable of allowing people to die. We will do anything, we will spend any amount of money, and we will indeed take away any amount of freedom that is required to ensure that (some) people do not die. There is, quite literally, nothing we as a society will not do to ensure that all those who desire life will get it as long as possible, no matter their actions or choices in life. And most often the first thing that must be taken away to absolve people of the responsibility of their actions is the freedoms of others -- and that's just plain wrong.
Can you name a single elected official that actually supports freedom? When is the last time you heard your local county politician say, at a zoning board meeting, "Gee, folks, we don't have any right to tell this person what to build on their property -- it's their property, not ours?" If we were in a truly free country, you would hear that.
Have you ever heard a politician say, "I'm sorry, but we can't give away that million dollars to the poor children so they can have medicine. It's not our money to give." Again, in a free country, that would indeed be the case.
So feel free to discuss the merits of the "education lottery," the "clean air" laws, and the "health insurance for the poor." But realize that's not freedom. Go to your town meetings and oppose the building of an interchange where you don't want one. Tell your representatives to support the minimum wage. Ask for more money for the government school -- but don't tell me you support freedom.
And repeat to yourself that we're the freest country in the world. Feel free to tell me that I'm crazy and I'm welcome to leave this country any time I like. But know that you do not have freedom, and you likely never will. We, as a society, simply will not abide the real responsibility that comes with true freedom.
Freedom may not be compassionate, but freedom is good. As a society, we are no longer capable of allowing neutral freedom. We require compassion, and we will do anything to obtain it -- including destroying every semblance of freedom that exists today. We have lost freedom, and it will not soon be found again.
Oh, how I yearn for freedom.
Linked to:
Pirate's Cove Linkfest
Woman Honor Thyself
Third World Country
Church and State
Is it Just Me?
N.I.F.
Posted by: Ogre at
11:01 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1473 words, total size 9 kb.
1
Yep...Americans do not have a concept of what true freedom really is. The best we can do is to keep speaking of what it is and ask others to do the same. Vote? yes. We're not really given a good choice with the people BUT it could be worse.
Posted by: Raven at November 07, 2006 01:33 PM (s07t4)
2
Oh, it could always be worse...but I just don't see it getting any better any time in my lifetime.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2006 02:55 PM (oifEm)
3
OK I was trying to optimistic. It's not working though. At all. I'm not banking on anything good happening today.
Posted by: Raven at November 07, 2006 08:23 PM (nWhDT)
4
I want to be optimistic -- I really do. It's just not working. And that's besides the election today. No matter which party wins, we will lose more freedom.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2006 08:30 PM (oifEm)
5
wow Ogre..thats one intense post..I'm linkin up to it bro.
Posted by: Angel at November 07, 2006 08:49 PM (qo/NM)
6
Thank you, Angel. It's one intense topic.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2006 09:58 PM (GPb4I)
7
Good post! This is what was going through my head when I proposed the "Vote No" party. Has there eveer been a bill in Congress to INCREASE freedom?
Posted by: Echo Zoe at November 08, 2006 12:24 AM (8POA1)
8
The only bills in Congress that would increase freedom are the ones your new party supports: the removal of current bills. And again, I'm not trying to just point out that we don't have freedom -- I honestly don't think society has the stomach for freedom any more. We're too spoiled and too nice.
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2006 12:30 AM (GPb4I)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 06, 2006
A Magician
Today I present a magician...and I don't know his name. He was performing this weekend at
The Carolina Renaissance Festival at the Washer Wenches stage, but I didn't catch his name. Take a careful look and see if you can see what he's doing in this picture:

Yes, that's correct, he's nailing a nail into his face. There was a sword swallower at the festival a couple years ago I really loved, but he's moved on -- so this guy takes his place (at least for nails).
This fellow was an excellent magician, working the crowd and working classic magic tricks. Towards the end he really made the cups and balls tricks interesting when oranges started showing up! And for the grand finale, SIX oranges and a cantaloupe showed up! Very impressive. He also said he's be on Letterman in a couple weeks, so I'll see what else there might be to that!
Previously:
Dextre Tripp
Jewels of the Caravan
Blackenshear the Curious
The London Broil
Dextre Tripp
Posted by: Ogre at
07:03 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Ogre, I've always wondered about you, but your amusement at a guy hammering nails into his face has erased all doubt! LMBO
My first modeling assignment many decades ago was at a Renaissance Faire in SoCal, when they were just starting out. It was a blast for my then 18 year old bod to sport a cute little "tavern maiden" costume...as a history buff, it was great fun! However, had I seen someone hammer a nail in their face, I'd never have attended another! GROSS!
Sorry I didn't give you proper credit/link in that Vernon Robinson piece. I've rectified my ommission.
Posted by: DagneyT at November 06, 2006 10:51 PM (LbULG)
2
And this guy's got nothing on Thom the sword swallower from a couple years ago. That guy would actually use a hand drill to insert a DRILL into his nose! And that was just the warm-up for the swords down the throat.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 11:13 PM (GPb4I)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Why Vote?
Why should I bother to vote? After all, in New York, the dead
are voting in record numbers. Chuck Norris says
to vote for conservatives. Well there's none on the ballot anywhere near me (including the judges). I'll let you know if I spot one.
Some people that claim to like freedom are voting Democrat to teach those nasty big-government Republicans a lesson -- presumably by attempting to replace them with bigger government Democrats. And heck, according to the media, the Democrats have already won. Maybe the dead are winning with large amounts of "early voting."
Around the world, leftists are winning. Why should the US be any different? Why shouldn't we give up on freedom? Where on this entire planet, is freedom expanding? Where is freedom successful in the 21st century? It works everywhere it's tried, but no one is trying it any more.
The only possible tiny glimmer of hope for freedom left on the planet lies with The Free State Project -- and they can't seem to find 20,000 people on the entire damn planet that are interested in freedom. And oh yes, I've signed up. And I've joined as part of the first 1,000. So where's everyone else who wants freedom?
Posted by: Ogre at
04:36 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Why vote? Because my country needs me.
Posted by: oddybobo at November 06, 2006 04:41 PM (mZfwW)
2
But Oddy, you're not on my ballot and in North Carolina, it's against the law to write-in people you really want to vote for.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 04:50 PM (oifEm)
3
What, no write in ballots? [shakes her head in disbelief]
So,as one of the first 1,000 do you get a T-shirt?
Posted by: michele at November 06, 2006 05:45 PM (BN/Fu)
4
If we get 1,000, we'll get much more than t-shirts! We'll get freedom.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 08:03 PM (oifEm)
5
I hope the first 1000 works! I've signed up as a "friend" of the FSP a while back. Busy making noise in OC, but depending on the state of the nation, NH is looking better and better. Maybe sooner than later. My kids are busy working for a scholarship in Water polo, and i just don't see NH being an advantage for them at this time. :-)
When they're in college and I retire, I go up there and raise some hell with you.
Posted by: Mark in OC at November 07, 2006 05:49 PM (VyO0o)
6
I've heard from those already on the ground there that it's a good time -- I'm ready to cram some freedom down some people's throats, whether they want it or not.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2006 06:24 PM (oifEm)
7
If my wife wasn't tying me to the People's Republic of Minnesota, I'd sign up. (She is not a liberal, she just doesn't want to live so far from her family)
Posted by: Echo Zoe at November 08, 2006 12:16 AM (8POA1)
8
Oh, just get her to move the whole family! (As long as they're not all liberals, too)
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2006 12:29 AM (GPb4I)
9
Nope, her parents are small business owners, and could definitely afford to pay all of the moving expenses.
Posted by: Echo Zoe at November 08, 2006 02:16 AM (8POA1)
10
Well, come on! Bring them along! I'm being serious here! Vote with your feet and invite everyone along to join in with freedom.
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2006 12:29 PM (oifEm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Cheney's Sense of Humor
If nothing else,
this shows that Republicans, and Cheney in particular, certainly have a sense of humor. Dick Cheney is going hunting on election day. After all the tasteless jokes over and over again about the last time he went hunting, in which an associate of his was accidentally shot in the face, the timing on this absolutely has to be intentional.
Either it's for the humor value, or to get the lunatics over at the Democratic Underground something shiny to look at and talk about.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:01 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Hunting Matters!
Karl Rove is in control again....
Posted by: Michael at November 06, 2006 04:01 PM (JWeV4)
2
I wonder if Rove ever goes hunting.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 04:12 PM (oifEm)
Posted by: michele at November 06, 2006 04:44 PM (cV7Xy)
4
I haven't been with Cheney, if that's what you're asking.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 04:51 PM (oifEm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
NC needs $125 Million
Hey, the economy's good, right? Therefore, the NC government can raise taxes to give $125 million to
start a research institution for nanotechnology. After all, if government doesn't do it, no one will, right?
According the the article and the supporters of huge, bloated government, by spending this money, we can bring back the dead; we can cure Michael J. Fox; and heck, why not, maybe even cure cancer. So if you oppose raising taxes enough to throw away yet another $125 million, you're against curing cancer!
Bloated. Useless. Communist. Utterly and completely anti-freedom. Your North Carolina Democrat Party.
Posted by: Ogre at
11:05 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Yea, but that is jsut NC part...I'm sure NC will seek and recieve ear mark money to help with the cost overruns.
besides it creates jobs too.
Posted by: Michael at November 06, 2006 01:30 PM (pkkrm)
2
Sure, you can help pay for this, too...whether you want to or not!
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 03:06 PM (oifEm)
Posted by: michele at November 06, 2006 05:47 PM (cV7Xy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 04, 2006
Thoughts for the Weekend
via
Flight Pundit
Good health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.
Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; Teach a person to use the Internet and they won't bother you for weeks.
Some people are like a Slinky... not really good for anything, but you still can't help but smile when you shove them down the stairs.
Health freaks are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing.
All of us could take a lesson from the weather. It pays no attention to criticism.
Why does a slight tax increase cost you 50 dollars and a substantial tax cut saves you 50 cents?
In the 60s, people took LSD to make the world weird. Now the world is weird and people take Prozac to make it normal.
We know exactly where any untaxed car is located among the millions of cars in the United States. But we haven't got a clue as to where thousands terrorists and crooks are located. Maybe we should put the DMV in charge of the police.
Posted by: Ogre at
06:23 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Sounds like a good idea. Put the DMV in charge. They always seem to be able to track me down.
Posted by: PoliticalCritic at November 05, 2006 02:20 PM (dVBfH)
2
Those are great. I shall refrain from snagging them. *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*
Have A God Blessed Week!!!!
Blessings
*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.
Posted by: patty at November 05, 2006 07:49 PM (EJVBR)
3
Thanks for stopping along, both of you!
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 12:24 AM (GPb4I)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Conservative Redefined
It seems that, like the Democrat Party, the Republican are simply changing their definition of words to fit their own purposes. Many who supported the Democrat Party when they were classic liberals have found the party has left them. Many have not yet realized their party has drastically morphed. Republicans are picking up on that morphing as well to their own party.
Yesterday I got an ad supporting a Republican for Congress in my district. He will win with about 75% of the vote because the district was clearly and obviously drawn to elect a Republican. His ad says: "Re-Elect Patrick McHenry for Congress. Effective. Conservative."
So, let's see what the "new" definition of "Conservative" is:
"Congressman Patrick McHenry voted against CAFTA because it would cost thousands of Western North Carolina jobs"
So now, supporting higher prices and reducing freedom for companies is somehow conservative?
He's fighting to get more money out of the education bureaucracy....
So increasing government spending is now also, apparently, "conservative."
I SO wish there was somewhere for people to go who actually wanted to be free, because this place sure isn't it.
Posted by: Ogre at
04:13 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 191 words, total size 1 kb.
1
"I promise to do dis, dat, und dee odda theeng!"
The Three Stooges
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 04, 2006 04:36 PM (x4Fjq)
2
They'd get elected if they put a D or R behind their name.
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2006 06:07 PM (196ug)
3
He's fighting to get more money out of the education bureaucracy....
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but I thought getting money
out of bureaucracy was a good thing. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to explain where he wants that money to go, to understand why this is not conservative.
Posted by: McGehee at November 04, 2006 08:41 PM (lAOTn)
4
He wants MORE spending by the government. And, of course, for government to get money, they have to take it from me fight. Conservatives from previous decades would want government to take less and spend less.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 12:25 AM (GPb4I)
5
Fair enough. Though the ad makes it sound like the money's already in the bureaucracy, that could be just like Clinton referring to tax hikes as increases in "contributions."
Posted by: McGehee at November 06, 2006 01:15 AM (lAOTn)
6
Indeed, same idea. This position by many Republicans is, "Well gee, we already took the damn money from you, let's spend it on GOOD things instead of the bad things Democrats will spend it on."
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 01:57 AM (GPb4I)
7
I've come to the conclusion that McHenry has no idea what he is doing -- he just wants to be in Congress.
Posted by: JAT at November 06, 2006 12:27 PM (dH2ZC)
8
That's true, and you'd be more convinced if you talked to him in person. I met him at a town meeting last year. He agreed with everyone in the room that immigration was a problem -- but he openly said, "Gee, I don't know what the solution is. No matter what we try, some people wouldn't like it."
In other words, he's not going to do anything that might make people not like him -- or not re-elect him.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 12:35 PM (oifEm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Governor Easley "creates" jobs
Well, I guess that's not really news, is it? In
this case, the governor is taking $1.52 million of money that people of North Carolina worked hard to obtain, and he's using it to bribe a business to come to North Carolina.
Oh, but he can't claim total credit for the "creation" of new jobs. You see The N.C. Department of Commerce, Guilford County, the City of High Point, the High Point Economic Development Corp. and the Piedmont Triad Partnership (ALL HUGE piles of taxpayer money) ALSO used truckloads of cash to bribe the business to relocate to North Carolina. But don't worry, it will create a whopping 200 jobs.
Because there are so many government entities involved, it will be impossible to determine the exact amount of taxpayer funds wasted on this bribery. Extremely conservative estimates would put the total at $200 million. For 200 jobs. Yes, the state of North Carolina just spend over $1 MILLION per person to create 200 jobs that pay an average of $33,695. And they think that it's a good thing.
This is your Democrat-led North Carolina government.
Posted by: Ogre at
12:03 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The average voter has the mathematics skills of a two year old. Politicians know that. Now you know it too.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 04, 2006 12:37 PM (x4Fjq)
2
Guess he's using a tactic that has been used by the democrats, especially Boucher, in Va for years. Use taxpayer money to bribe a company to set up shop in the state for three years and then move on. Offer them massive tax breaks and build them facilities. As soon as the tax break expires they move to N.C. or some other state that will give them the tax breaks. Never a permanent job, always temp's. The worst part of it is that the dim's are so stupid they don't see what is happening and won't believe it even after it happens over and over.
Posted by: Scrapiron at November 04, 2006 03:07 PM (0Co69)
3
And it's really in violation of the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately, since all the governments are getting re-elected and bribed, no one will challenge this blatantly unconstitutional practice.
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2006 04:05 PM (196ug)
4
How do I sign up to get bribed?
Posted by: Michael at November 04, 2006 04:26 PM (pkkrm)
5
Get elected. Oh, and before that, you have to join the political party and go over to the dark side.
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2006 06:06 PM (196ug)
6
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Getting the folks from the colonies to sit down and create the United States of America took a whole lot of effort, because -- they were all afraid of the very things our politicians today have made common practice happening, and wanted no part of any of it.
If those people had been given a glimpse of the future (of today), they would've simply said, "No, thanks" and gone their separate ways.
Posted by: Seth at November 04, 2006 11:25 PM (r1vdM)
7
Oh, absolutely Seth, without question. What we have today is absolutely nothing like what the founders ever imagined would happen.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2006 12:24 AM (GPb4I)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 03, 2006
Dextre Tripp
I know, I know, I introduced you to
Dextre Tripp earlier in the week. But you know, I enjoy his show so much, I've got to show him twice. Heck, you might even get to see another glimpse of him next week, too -- he's that good.
This shot is during his fire and water show. He balances on the top of the ladder, then lights off 300 firecrackers, then lets everyone throw water balloons at him! Is this guy crazy, or what?

(Click to enlarge
Once again, if you can find time to get to the
Carolina Renaissance Festival, be absolutely sure to check out Dextre Tripp. His stage is all the way at the back, but you be sure to head back there -- you will NOT regret it!
Previously:
Jewels of the Caravan
Blackenshear the Curious
The London Broil
Dextre Tripp
Posted by: Ogre at
07:07 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 148 words, total size 1 kb.
Caloenas nicobarica
Isn't this little guy beautiful?

It's a Caloenas nicobarica, or The Nicobar Pigeon. It's native to the uninhabited Nicobar Islands in the Indian Ocean. I wonder how they found it, then...
Posted by: Ogre at
05:04 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Pigeon = rat with wings.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at November 03, 2006 05:19 PM (U8gb+)
2
Normally, I'd completely agree with you...but this is NOT a New York City pigeon!
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 07:33 PM (oifEm)
3
Hey! You leave our winged rats alone. Only we can disparage them cause we live them. After all, we don't calling all you Southern folk rednecks and all you Michiganders.... uh... what do they call them anyway, unemployed assembly workders? Oh yes I went there! It's called transferrence. Yes, I'm beginning to feel better already by picking on you people.
Posted by: michele at November 03, 2006 08:42 PM (cV7Xy)
4
There was a comedian once who really made fun of New York pidgeons. He said something along the lines of "What's up with their call? There's so much pollution that their call is stuck in their throat! They can't even make normal bird sounds!"
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 08:48 PM (oifEm)
Posted by: michele at November 03, 2006 09:39 PM (y9UuV)
6
I'd imitate them for you to make the joke visual, but I'm thinking that's not going to work here...
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 10:55 PM (196ug)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Human Shields Die
It's about time.
Women that were human shields were killed by Israelis. Folks, if you want to be a human shield for terrorists, prepare to die. This is another example of so-called "peaceful" participants in the war on terror. It's a war. People will die. Want it to end? Get the muslims (Hamas, et al) to stop.
Posted by: Ogre at
04:59 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Two observations here: One, if these women went voluntarily into a situation in which they were knowingly going to be human shields, they have nobody to blame but themselves for the consequences -- the fact that they were doing so to protect others who fire rockets into civilian centers to murder innocent people means they deserved to die, as they were aiding and abetting same.
Two, the terrorists calling upon their uncle and patron Koffi, knowing they'll get sympathy from that quarter, just shows even further that the outgoing head of the UN is as much a terrorist as they are, even though he doesn't actually blow anything up.
Posted by: Seth at November 03, 2006 07:10 PM (r1vdM)
2
Indeed, the only reason Kofi was not a human shield himself is because he lacks the conviction to actually put himself in danger to advance the terrorists' causes.
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 07:39 PM (oifEm)
3
Muslims blow up Muslims. It's the way of it. Let them keep it up. Maybe one day they will kill themselves off.
Muslims blow up innocent Israelis. Let the Israelis blow them back.
Let's help the Muslims blow. Got Nuke? Make glass.
Posted by: Raven at November 03, 2006 10:58 PM (DjxXc)
4
Three words:
Glass Parking Lot.
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2006 04:13 PM (196ug)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Sue Myrick gets it
I heard a radio ad on the way into work today. Sue Myrick (R-NC9) gets it. I can't find the text of the ad, but it general goes something like this:
Radical muslim jihadists want to kill us. And they are coming across our southern border. I want to stop them. I want to add guards to the southern border and I voted for a border fence.
She gets it, she really does.
Keep in mind when you vote next week, this IS the Republican Congress. Sure, Bush has some serious problems with the border and immigration, but he's not up for election, the Congress is. Vote Republican if you support Sue's position. Vote Democrat if you oppose it.
Posted by: Ogre at
03:08 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.
1
A nation is like a family. Those who are most likely to harm you already live here.
Again, a politician is pandering to the public's fear of screaming idiots from overseas.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 03, 2006 05:47 PM (x4Fjq)
2
It's not really pandering when those fears are realistic.
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 07:38 PM (oifEm)
3
Violent crime committed against individual Americans by other Americans does not seriously threaten the interests of wealthy, powerful people in spite of the fact that our national murder rate is between five and six 9/11's every year.
Acts of terrorism do threaten wealthy powerful people and serve as a vehicle to unify voters and focus their attention on a perceived, common threat. Foreign terrorists are not a minor problem, but your children are far more likely to be killed by a family member, neighbor, or classmate.
Guess which threat receives the most attention today.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 03, 2006 10:16 PM (x4Fjq)
4
Guess no one who died in NYC or the Pentagon were "wealthy, powerful people."
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 10:54 PM (196ug)
5
I'm sorry, but fear of people who are honestly working their entire life to kill me is a very rational fear.
Posted by: Ogre at November 10, 2006 10:54 AM (GPb4I)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
More Hatred for Freedom
The sorry, utterly useless morons at WakeUpWalMart again
complain about freedom. These people are so full of irrational hatred, it never ceases to amaze me. I have some problems with some WalMart policies, but they are based on freedom, not hatred.
The organization actually claims that WalMart DARES to attempt to cut labor costs. Seriously. They are complaining that a company wants to cut costs. Would they be happier of WalMart raised all their prices? What absolutely irrational stupidity!
Chris Kofinis, a spokesman for the deranged anti-freedom morons, claims that it's anti-family to actually require people to show up for work. He claims that WalMart has adopted a new, restrictive attendance policy. Obviously, Chris has never worked a day in his life. EVERY place I've worked will fire you for not showing up. Apparently WalMart DOESN'T. I've fired people who have been late TWICE before. I guess Chris would really hate me for exercising my freedom. And make no mistake about it -- this is very clearly and obviously STRONGLY anti-freedom. You see, if WalMart cannot fire people for not showing up for work, then according to Chris, everyone has a right to be paid for staying home. That's assanine.
But yes, there's more! WalMart also has decided to allow employees some options when it comes to health care -- and again, according to scumbag Chris, that's BAD! And of course, if health care costs go up, employees shouldn't have to pay for it. In their view, everyone has the personal right to health care, AND they shouldn't have to pay for it. That's slavery people, plain and simple -- because if I don't have to pay for health care, but YOU have to provide it, what freedom do you have?
People like this need to be put out on the street to fend for themselves -- if they are listened to, freedom and liberty will continue to decline until we have none left. Oh, how I yearn for freedom.
Raven agrees.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:03 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 340 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Rewarding those who chronically do nothing is obviously a recipe for economic disaster, but our current sustem only rewards two kinds of people:
Those who already have the financial resources to acquire education for themselves and their children, to make investments in their future, and to maintain a lifestyle that allows enough free time to participate in and influence the decision making process. (If you're established, you stay established.)
Those who possess the entreprenurial skill to begin with very little and turn an idea into a fortune. (A tiny minority of people.)
No one else, regardless of how hard working or moral they are seems to matter. This system sends a clear message to young people who fall into neither favored group and are now being tempted by the rewards of criminal behavior.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 03, 2006 03:13 PM (x4Fjq)
2
I don't buy that. Although it's more difficult than ever today, thanks to useless social programs, hard work still can pay off. And if the rewards for criminal behavior are higher than the potential punishments (which they clearly are), then there is no disincentive to criminal behavior.
I know of what I speak for at one time I had literally nothing but the clothes on my back. I had no house, no vehicle, nothing. I CHOSE not to engage in criminal activities, but instead decided to work. And no, it's wasn't entreprenurial skill, it started as working nights cleaning up a 7-11.
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 03:17 PM (oifEm)
3
The media and popular culture tends to focus upon motive whenever someone commits a media worthy act. The nut who murdered those Amish school girls is a good example. Everyone will strain their imaginations trying to figure out why he targeted what has to be the most outwardly harmless demographic group in America. They should not waste their time on such things.
I've frequently emphasized the absence of inhibition (See Lesson V) as the most important element in any crime, particularly the absence of empathy. Belonging to a society and an economic system that treats individuals like disposable labor units maintains a culture where it becomes normal to think of everyone you simple dislike or find inconvenient in the same context. We emphasize the rhetoric of the Golden Rule, but our most powerful institutions practice the precise opposite. A society where the disposability of people is normal is a society where abortion and assisted suicide become painless, unembarrassing concepts.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 03, 2006 05:22 PM (x4Fjq)
4
That's an...interesting point of view you have. Based on what you've said here, it appears that you believe there is no such thing as objective reality. Do you believe that? Is everything relative, or is there such thing as an absolute truth?
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 07:35 PM (oifEm)
5
WOD-
I disagree with you. Way back, I didn't even have a HS diploma. I was 16, a very recently recovered heroin addict, a new Mom...on my own. I got a job at a factory, working nights at first so my family could watch my baby. It was hard brutal work, with a lot of rules. I neeeeded that job though, so I never once broke the rules. Many around me did though and whined when they got called on it.
I went back to school, got my HS diploma and went to college for a nursing degree. It was extremely difficult to do this: Work full time, take care of a very young child,and go to classes 5 nights a week AND study (nursing is very hard). I depended upon NO one to help me. I took no grants and other free for alls from my government. I wanted to make my effort MINE, and when you do that, you tend to value your work and job a little more.
One doesn't have to be rich to get on in this country. And one doesn't have to have an entreprenurial spirit to get by either.
All that is needed is the will to do the best you can, and to work hard to get what you want in life.
Posted by: Raven at November 03, 2006 11:08 PM (DjxXc)
6
WOMD said:
"Belonging to a society and an economic system that treats individuals like disposable labor units maintains a culture where it becomes normal to think of everyone you simple dislike or find inconvenient in the same context. We emphasize the rhetoric of the Golden Rule, but our most powerful institutions practice the precise opposite."
Where did this come from?? I am confused. The Golden rule?
No business can afford to be SO nice to it's employees that the business suffers loss of customers and therefore revenue. Employees have enough rights in this country too- more than enough in my opinion.
The relationship between a boss and a subordinate is business in nature. While everyone expects the boss to be polite and YES, follow the Golden rules, the boss has the obligation to make sure his employees are doing their jobs correctly-- this includes making sure their attendance isn't bad. Like it or not, there has to be some rules. Or chaos will rule.
Businesses have an obligation to weed out those who are not interested in working. It's simple.
We cannot be a nation of too many dogooders. Even socialism would collapse under such ideas as the anti Wal Mart crowd aspires to.
Posted by: Raven at November 03, 2006 11:16 PM (DjxXc)
7
Ogre,
My philosophy of existence is very simple.
The universe is a logical, structured place which appears to follow laws of physics that do not conveniently change to suit the needs of whoever's in charge of the government or the predominant religion this week. It's not unreasonable to assume that whatever created the universe is also a logical entity with a sense of purpose. I don't believe that there's an all powerful deity micromanaging everyone's lives and deciding who to punish. That's where religion crosses the line into politics. Our creator established the laws of physics, set the initial conditions, and simply allowed the universe run its course, hoping for a particular outcome.
One of the more obvious processes going on in the universe is the tendency for simple structures, systems, and processes to evolve into more complex ones. This is not restricted to clouds of hydrogen turning into stars. Simple forms of life become more complex over time and we are the current end result. What the end result is supposed to be in a few thousand years remains to be seen, but it's not a wild leap of faith to assume that our creator would like civilization to actually work, become more stable, and more complex. Given the human tendency to accumulate knowledge as a means to becoming more powerful and more survivable, one could speculate that we really are the children of God, and that it's up to us to find our own way to maturity.
But, there's a problem. It's the problem that I described in my August, 2005 post, "How to rationalize domestic terrorism."
We are developing technology, and subsequently developing our ability to cause harm faster than we are conditioning each new generation to feel empathy for others. I predict that within a few decades; 30 years was the time I used in my post, some individual with the right technical knowledge is going to give the insurance industry a really bad day.
And what does this have to do with Wal-Mart?
As I stated in a previous comment above, "the absence of inhibition (See Lesson V in my weblog.) is the most important element in any crime, particularly the absence of empathy." Motive is not important. There's always a motive to harm others. There's always something to gain. Allowing large, powerful institutions like Wal-Mart to "reduce labor costs" by firing American workers and subcontracting to slave labor firms overseas is an example of intentionally causing harm to others in pursuit of one's objective. How difficult will it be 30 years from now for some technophile at MIT to follow the same line of reasoning when he decides that the earth is just too damned overpopulated?
If I had the opportunity to step into a time machine and travel a century or so into the future, I'd be very shocked to find an intact civilization here. I think we're screwed and I can't find anyone who feels comfortable even admitting that there's a problem.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 04, 2006 12:30 AM (x4Fjq)
8
WOMD-
You're totally weird. And off base. ALlowing powerful institutions like Wal Mart to reduce labor costs?? Since when is holding staff accountable to policies a bad thing? What do you say to the hospitals and nursing homes who have even stricter attendance policies than Wal Mart? What will you say to the patients who have no nurses at work on any given shift, because the powerful hospital had to relax it's policies so as nt to offend those who like to call out a lot?
I work in nursing and I have never seen a policy as lax as Wal Marts. Get a grip and-- go live on your Utopia wherever it may be.
Posted by: Raven at November 04, 2006 01:54 AM (DjxXc)
9
Raven,
If I blindly devote my life to ancient scripture, writings that have been translated multiple times and could easily have been created by flawed, corruptable men, then I am a devout follower, someone to be respected.
If I choose to find meaning in the structure of the universe, something that corruptable men have no influence over and only God could have created, I am "totally weird."
Thank you for reinforcing my beliefs.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 04, 2006 12:30 PM (x4Fjq)
10
I find it interesting that you, WMD, believe in a theory that is supposedly based on facts and logic, but in fact, to actually exist, has to have no actual logical chance of existing.
I am sure you do think that we're causing harm faster than we feel empathy. I'm quite sure when the bow and arrow was invented the same thought was felt by many. Ditto the catapult, gunpowder, and the atomic bomb. We're still here.
And it is quite a strange and different point of view to claim that people should only be viewed objects that should not be harmed in any manner, at any time, by any one. I'm not sure how you can connect that view with any sort of reality that's ever existed. As Raven has suggested, perhaps you're imagining some strange utopia that has never, nor will ever exist on this world. It will, however, exist somewhere else -- a place that you strangely seem to have absolutely zero desire in going. Yes, what a strange view to have for a supposedly rational person.
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2006 04:20 PM (196ug)
11
The bow and arrow, the catapult, and gunpowder can be manufactured and employed by an individual determined to cause harm. But none of these weapons can be employed to cause harm to society on a statistically significant scale.
Nuclear (nukular) weapons can be employed to cause statistically significant harm to entire societies, but they are expensive, difficult to obtain, and generally in the hands of complex and disciplined groups of people, none of whom have anything of significance to gain from mass murder.
I'm predicting that well before this century ends, our biotechnology industry will mature to the point where a single individual will acquire the ability to undermine the accuracy of the actuarial tables. He will be able to precipitate sudden, economically significant changes of behavior in large portions of our population. Large industries depend upon the predictability of aggregate populations in order to maintain economies of scale. And I'm not the only person who forsees this type of scenario.
The January/February, 1998 edition of
Foreign Affairs featured an article titled,
The New Threat of Mass Destruction by Richard K. Betts, Director of National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations and Professor of Political Science and Director of the Institute for War and Peace Studies at Columbia University. His article included a catchy subtitle:
What if McVeigh had used anthrax?
I've been called worse names than wierdo or irrational before, but I'm not the only one who sees a problem.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 04, 2006 04:57 PM (x4Fjq)
12
Two different points in the thread here.
The first is that you're saying the universe is logical and only works according to known, man-defined, laws of physics. To do so, however, is simply impossible when mathematics is applied to the theory.
The second is the idea of mass destruction. No, no one thinks it's not a threat (well, except Democrats). But notice the dire predictions from 1998 hasn't happened yet. But that's the point of the current war on terror and international affairs -- the insane leader of Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapons, because HE WILL use them because he is irrational. The US has them, but is currently rational enough NOT to use them.
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2006 06:10 PM (196ug)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
NC Spends Money for Jobs
The board in Winston-Salem
is discussing how much money to spend and where to spend it on "economic strategies" to "ensure more jobs come to the state." Again, there is only ONE possible reaction to this "news" that can come from anyone even remotely interested in freedom:
WHY?!?
Can someone find somewhere, anywhere, in either the US or North Carolina Constitution that says, "Government shall be tasked with creating all jobs for all people of the state?" I can't find that. In a free country, government would be completely, 100% neutral towards jobs and job creation. What if I don't WANT a new job and they create one for me anyway? How much longer before they force me to accept these jobs they're creating?
Government creating jobs is absolutely wrong. That's exactly how socialism and communism work: government creates the jobs. Government should, instead, DECREASE jobs in the state by firing 3/4 of the damn state employees and bureaucrats. And if you're a state employee, yes, I'm talking to you. If the government did that, know what would happen? The economy of North Carolina would absolutely EXPLODE as freedom took hold and others who wanted freedom would absolutely FLOCK to the state to take part of the new opportunities.
But that would require elected officials who wanted freedom. Not too likely in North Carolina, and it'll never happen as long as Democrats are in control of the state legislature.
Posted by: Ogre at
11:05 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 249 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Politicians are not rewarded for improving the living conditions of citizens. They're rewarded for doing what athletes and popular celebrities do. They facilitate the formation of fantasy. The fantasies promoted by athletes and other celebrities are relatively obvious. And in a world where so many people feel left out, politicians have found that the fantasy of inclusion is a powerful drug for the masses.
Vote for me and I will pass laws that force those big wigs at the gigantic, evil corporation to share the wealth that your labor has created.
It's an old game, made all the more interesting by the invention of mass media.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 03, 2006 03:21 PM (x4Fjq)
2
They're rewarded with cash from people who pay them to give them cash. IT's a sick "game" is what it is -- and everyone except the politicians are the ones who lose. EVERYONE.
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 03:34 PM (oifEm)
3
Politicians are in the fantasy business.
If you believe in God and Heaven, they'll be delighted to promote legislation that feeds into your beliefs.
If you believe that life is some sort of lottery where those who are chronically lazy and parasitic were simply dealt a bad hand, they'll be equally delighted to reinforce the idea that the government should blindly transfer the fruits of someone else's labor in your direction.
Don't be fooled by either party. They're both pandering. They're just pandering to different demographic groups.
Posted by: Weapon of Mass Disturbance at November 03, 2006 05:32 PM (x4Fjq)
4
There's no question they're pandering. None at all. A true statemen wouldn't, but we haven't seen one of those since at least 1988.
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 07:35 PM (oifEm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 02, 2006
Jewels of the Caravan
*** Update: Added the picture!
Today, highlighting acts I like at the Carolina Renaissance Festival, I'd like to present The Jewels of the Caravan. Very, VERY unfortunately, I forgot to upload the picture last night, so I have no picture to show you of them. Now feel free to head on over to their web site, where you can see much better pictures than anything *I* could take.
This is a "high-energy troupe performs a variety of ethnic dance and music, influenced by India, Africa and the Middle East. Invigorating the festivities with the gypsy spirit of celebration, they captivate their audience." And they're not kidding.

(Click to enlarge)
It's a great show, but unfortunately, it's show times often conflict with Dextre's shows, so I don't get to see this show too many times -- much to my regret. Folks, it's more than just some lovely ladies up and dancing -- even though it is that, too. You will be memorized by the skills and abilities of this group. They are extremely talented, and I can't imagine the time and effort that goes into learning how to dance that well together.
Yet another show that I highly, highly recommend if you can find the time to head out to the festival. This weekend, I'll be there all afternoon Sunday, hopefully taking more pictures of some acts I didn't get last weekend! Be sure to keep coming back if you want to read more reviews, or just to visit the festival vicariously as some do.
Previously:
Blackenshear the Curious
The London Broil
Dextre Tripp
Posted by: Ogre at
07:03 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 272 words, total size 2 kb.
1
With each new RenFest review I come to the realization that this festival is the most amazing and varied I've ever known about.
It just has come closer to me than NC... it just has to!
Posted by: michele at November 03, 2006 01:05 PM (1Akxj)
2
And this one is really big, from what I've seen. Many of the other festivals are smaller than this one. I know a number of the performers at this fair also travel to the fair in Arizona, but that's no closer to you.
Posted by: Ogre at November 03, 2006 01:08 PM (196ug)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Stop the ACLU
Crossposted from
Stop The ACLU
I was going to talk about the dishonest argument the ACLU made in its attack on Hazelton, PA for trying to crackdown on illegal immigration problems. They argued that it was not the place of small communities to create laws fashioned to their own unique problems on illegal immigration, but the Federal government's responsibility. Of course this argument does not reflect the ACLU's true beliefs on the topic. If the Federal government created a similar law as Hazelton the ACLU would find a different argument to oppose it. The argument was, however, good enough to convince a Clinton appointed judge to temporarily block their ordinances.
more...
Posted by: Ogre at
05:01 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1145 words, total size 9 kb.
Black claims Decker Perjured himself!
The Jim Black (speaker of the NC House, Democrat, guilty of elections violations and possibly more, strongly supported by Democrats across the state) situation gets more and more interesting. Now Jim Black is claiming that Michael Decker, the Republican who was paid cash to switch parties and ensure Democrats would retain power (and gerrymander for 10 years), has openly lied while under oath.
That's a pretty strong accusation, isn't it? It's not a lie about sex, so apparently it really counts as a lie. Either way, Black is now openly saying that Decker is a perjurer. So now, someone should get some (more) jail time. If Decker is indeed lying, he should be charged with perjury and throw in jail. If Decker's telling the truth, then Black is lying, and needs to go to jail on federal corruption and racketeering charges.
The Meck Deck is following this closely as well.
Posted by: Ogre at
03:29 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 160 words, total size 1 kb.
103kb generated in CPU 0.0276, elapsed 0.1568 seconds.
102 queries taking 0.1378 seconds, 309 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.