Archive for the ‘it sucks’ Category

On lying thru their teeth: MLK, three cups of tea bs et al.

June 8, 2011

Reading   Hampton Sides in Newsweek about his incredible incredulous mental ride to learn of Greg Mortenson monstrous (alledegly) lying “Three cups of tea”, thru Krakauers’ 60 minutes interview on the subject. Reading HS I shockingly re-learned about MLK plagiarism: MLK a plagiarist I asked myself?  I am vaguely aware of news about it a long time ago?? 

 However Sides, incorrectly ends: ” Mortenson himself said he was heading to the hospital for surgery to repair a “hole in my heart”—presumably a literal one. Until we hear from him, I prefer to hold on to the perhaps naive belief that the final truth of these allegations will fall somewhere shy of doing irreparable harm to his great cause. The idea of Three Cups of Tea remains heroic, even if its creator has gone astray. I, for one, still want to believe.” This is bad, because it kills your argument and softens the case against lying.

So, bout MLK, Wikipedia: “A Boston University committee reports that while 45% of the first half and 21% of the second half of King’s thesis was plagiarized (from fellow Boozer)  it was still an original contribution to scholarship, and his degree should not be revoked. The true extent of King’s plagiarism is much greater, and comparing his thesis with its sources, one can only conclude that BU’s conclusion was purely political and academically dishonest”

So:  Was MLK a liar? 

Back to Mortenson: he is a liar. But someone like Sides is willing to take a pass on the minor (metaphorically)  aspect of the story which is: lies. (or maybe non-free will)

Everybody lies: it is so tiring, so tiring. Case in point to which I alluded before (present in my life since I read an unpaid subcription): the WSJ strategizes their editorial comments around lies or half baked truths, which are full baked lies; their editorial pages are organized around lies: just think of it. And some of their special sections (journal, so forth; I have particular distate by Matt Ridleys’ section which is  irksome, lying, besides the fact he is a nazistoid free market fundamentalist and worst probably)). Today (wednesday 8)  Seth Lipsky makes Peter Diamonds’ (the Economics Nobel)  failed nomination a constitutional issue, thru an obscurest thing -ed-about dollars, founders and silver and gold: I recomend it, read it, worth it, to learn how a lie is built reasoning (is this possible?). I would call this carefully reasoned lying. And moreover, in the same page, Holman W. Jenkins (Jerkins) Jr gives Goldman Sachs a pass by making their investigation  case a “witch hunt”. If you start an editorial by labelling a process a “witch hunt” (the Goldman Sachs witches) then nothing that follows is true, even is it is.  Yesterday (!) Thursday, Mr Henninger makes the following statement: “If next year the American people pull the plug on the Obama presidency, mark down the past week as the beginning of the end . . . and what looks like the real beginning of Tim Pawlenty’s candidacy.” You wish, Henninger,  I’ll bet you my whole year salary, Mr Henninger,  that Barack will beat the crap out of anyone, in 2012. Today according to the same WSJ, seems to be Rick Perry, the messianic TX governor. The TX free market economy has been sanctified by the wingnutters as the MODEL: The model Of what? Isnt he whole country capitalist? See what I mean: WSJ builds around the least of angles to build a lie that mirrors as true. TX, free market (as if didnt exist or was suppresed elsewhere else), freedom, Rick Perry, GOP nomination, the feds…bs…you follow my drift.


From Alito to Gaddafi

March 9, 2011

I wasnt gonna mention Hitchens (sick of it, no pun intended)) (I refuse to call him Hitch since he stole shamelessly from the movie) again. The guy has “metastasized” stage IV esophageal cancer, for crissake (actually is metastatic) and he should be left alone. Maybe. But, semiotics aside he got a mostly rabbinishisk looking beard, hence there is hint of life inside the bottle of black label in his pancreas. Hitch is being called the Collins miracle. Hitch mentioned the word “miracle” in a recent CBS interview and Jewish network ‘debate”. I think Hitch is flaking. What an irony, being saved by a total christian scientist; as good as it gets. By the way Coyne, who is secretly in love with Hitch, adoringly claims the Jewish network “debate” (what a macrobore) was a smackdown for Hitch and Sam. Coyne lies. Watch the video. If it wasnt for Harris hallucinatory incursion in afterlife consciousness the “debate” would have been a total loss. Instead was a near total loss.

In any case I wanted to draw attention to Hitchs’ call for Libya’s invasion at Slate. Piggybacking in Alito’s use of “brutal’ in the minority ruling on the infamous church of crazy (8 to 1!!!), Hitch delivers a passionate call for arms and invasion of Libya. Is he for real? I wont elaborate; many readers at Slate have counterargued Hitch to the fine print. I am still puzzled by his churriguresque detour from Alitos’ dissent. Really.
By the way, Fish has a rather interesting review of this ruling at the NYT; Fish of all: “Alito knows the answer. He begins his dissent by declaring, “Our profound national commitment to free and open debate is not a license for . . . vicious verbal assault” and he ends by insisting that “in order to have a society in which public issues can be openly and vigorously debated it is not necessary to allow the brutalization of innocent victims.”.Fish writes :” In short, you shouldn’t be able to produce speech with the intention of causing harm to a specific person and get it away with it because you slipped in a word or phrase that has or could have a more general application”. I kinda agree with him.

Not that I follow G. Will at the WP, but he asks cogent questions regarding consequences of “intervention” as he calls it. Intervention? Funny. Its sounds psychiatric.

More than 3000 rapes a year and counting.

February 15, 2011

I watched NBC todays’ news. There was a report of a lawsuit against the Armed Forces, the Military, (are there bare armed forces?) Robert Gates and dicko Rumsfeld are the defendants. The case is that rampant rape against women in the US military continues unabated. Almost 3 per day!!!. Believably unbelievable. So tragic.

Where is the public outcry? Nowhere to be seen. All those that made careers of the Catholic Church cover up of child abuse should now be opening this brutality up. Why not? Oh no..too sensitive? too parochial? too close to home? As usual the american psyche hides beneath something else. The revolutions in the arab world? The budget? Berlusconi and prostitution? Case inpoint: the NYT rather focused on clitoral mutilation in Africa-as tragic as it is- for years rather than the mutilation of women (many of them girls) here in the homeland. Moral cowards.

Jesse Ellison at the Daily Beast, today:

“A landmark lawsuit filed Tuesday against Defense Secretary Robert Gates and his predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld, alleges that the military’s repeated failures to take action in rape cases created a culture where violence against women was tolerated, violating the plaintiffs’ Constitutional rights”. Good going Jes. Get the rats out of their holes.

Feb 25: it has vanished from the air…

“We are in deep trouble”.

December 24, 2010

“People: we are in deep trouble”: Gene Lyons in” A deluded citizenry can’t effectively govern itself. Yet complacency and institutional cowardice causes “mainstream” media to play along with the fiction that Fox News is an ordinarily craven, celebrity-driven news organization”. More to the point: Take the fact that Newt, Palin, Huckabee and more, all presidential candidates potentially, are paid entertainers at foxnews. How can one conclude we are not in deep trouble if they dispense vitriol every week or so?
Evan Thompson in Newsweek, offers a rather starkly darkoverview of our current status as a nation (one under god??):” The irony is that the Internet and limitless TV channels once seemed to promise more truth. More information, from more sources, should have liberated the marketplace of ideas. Open, free, unfettered speech has usually served to expose the abuses of power. I assumed the same would be true when every citizen could become a journalist, and power could not be rendered unaccountable by secrecy. But it doesn’t seem to be working out that way. There is more noise and more opinion—but arguably not in the cause of truth. Untruths and gross distortions swirl around the Internet, supercharged by the cable-TV bias for hyperconflict”.. Thank you Thompson.

However, I feel the fox news/web/blog comment applies extensively to most US human endeavours 2010, capturing the zeitgeist of the year(s) we live in this backyard of the mexican hacienda. It applies to scientists and their science aboviously. Take Tom Junods’ ‘piece” in Esquire : “we dream in science:”….and this is how science will become like religion in all things except in its actuality“. Whoaa sailor!! (i love this expression, i wonder where it comes from; it is a late 40s song by Hank Thompson!1 and it written whoa sailor..rather silly and popeyesque)
Consider Ophrah trusting the intelligence of the american people not to vote for Palin-or Newt, or Huckabee or Rommney, for president: good luck and good night with that. Is Oprah really moronic (her book club bs is paramount)?. We elected Reagan, right?. Nixon, after three tries..we put up with Rove, what intelligence is she talking about??? maybe the intelligence to choose Murkoswki, what a force of nature; sock it you Miller.

Take Ms. Tracy Clark-Flory, *same Salon place than Mr Lyons* writing about “Hookers for Jesus”, a movement to support hookers (*running away from* pimps in Vegas). Good grief: is this real? yes painfully so. The citizenry’s dementia in USA running hammock. Hookers for Jesus…gasp…although I acknowledge the fact that the man (Jesus) had a soft spot for hookers. (if they looked like Mary Magdalene played by Barbara Hershey in Scorceses’ wild version of Christ last moments, I assume one has to sin). Thanks to Ms Clark-Flory for this fact-oid, albeit iconic.

…take Eric MacDonald, in flies on wheels *actually butterflies and wheels*.. revisionist rendition of contemporary history and declare that the enlightenment (gimme a break, please) wasnt such, in fact it fell short and the new atheism “movement” (rated one of the most overrated of the decade, for what ratings are worth) is picking up the fight of reason: “Despite its comprehensive overthrow by the Enlightenment – what Jonathan Israel calls “theology’s loss of hegemony in the eighteenth century” (Israel, Jonathan. Enlightenment Contested (Oxford: University Press, 2006), 68) – religion still has a disproportionate footprint in the public sphere, even in places where the Enlightenment originated and flourished. Counter-Enlightenment forces were very effective in preserving the structures of ecclesial power that existed in Europe and in societies whose majority populations derive from European immigration. Religious belief itself made successive accommodations to scientific discoveries and the liberal, democratic political arrangements that originated in foundational philosophical works of the Enlightenment”…disproportionate footprint?? yeah republicans have a very disproportionate footprint, so does foxnews, american football has a big footprint, pornography has huge footprint 9especially among republicnas)what else.?..anything one doesnt like is a ‘disproportionate footprint”? with allies like MacDonald we need a Better Enlightnement, not the sanctimonious whimpering of self designated guardians of reason and humankind like Mr MacDonald and others. I find that Mr MacDonalds (i wonder if his family has anything to do with burger king) comments mirror the attempts to recycle established ideas-even and including science-and metamorphose them in a ‘new’ kind of knowledge.

Take Sean Carroll, of the cosmic variance kind: he makes a pass at Leibniz..Leibniz for crissake, ( I bet he knows of him because Lee Smolin). Like MacDonalds pass at the enlightnement (should study more, Phillipp Blooms’ new book reviewed at the economist last month I think was very informed).

I find the citizenry-the gliteratti, the technorati-(think of castrati) a bunch that fails to acknowledge previous intellectual achivements and ideas and dont read history and dont learn a bit more of this place. The point being these guys, despite their credentials, speak off the cuff, from the hip, except they dont hit the targets. No targets really.

Take D 2 dismissing Maturana and Varela via someone else (reviewing Thompson and Cosmellis’ if I remember correctly). Bad move. Futurologists had predicted their (M&V) thinking will be more and more appreciated (how can knowledge be appreciated?). D2 makes a big mistake when pronounces M&V ideas (theories are not) just another way of telling the cell theory (sic). Or a gibberish “chemoton” kinda thing. bad move D2

Take Frontal Cortex lecturing about the ‘science of heroes” and the ‘science of charity”: a very slow f……………………Drop a curtain of decency over the stage. Last one out turn the lights off-once more.

Freedom(Liberty?) many crimes have been commited in thy name…

September 27, 2010

DISCLAIMER: Answering questions, I happen to LIKE Franzen. I should have said I didnt like the book; not that it sucks. Sorry. Franzen, just zeitgeist and schadenfreude

I know one for certain: Freedom by J, Franzen. Despite raving reviews of this “mythical” portrait of american life, it sucks. Which brings back the theme of this months truth and deception. The reviews could be construed as interested deception. Moreover, the sex in the book is pathetic. Oh my. another lame icon bestowed with undue rank. We deserve these minor contributions. We are minor. We became minor. Poor Lady Roland, inmortalized in truth, betrayed by  truth.