Gyroscopic Investing

It's chilling but just yesterday the House voted to continue the NSA program.

"Every country gets the Government it deserves" - Joseph de Maistre, French diplomat 1753-1821

Doesn't any criticism of the government provide some theoretical benefit to the foreign enemies of that government?  It is because there is no INTENT to benefit foreign enemies of the current government that most people realize that simply criticizing the government doesn't mean that the person criticizing it doesn't love his country.

This Snowden case is a great example of this sort of thing.  Does anyone REALLY believe that Snowden's purpose in blowing the whistle on unconstitutional secret surveillance of U.S. citizens was to benefit foreign enemies of the U.S.?  My take is that he did it to demonstrate the certain elements of the current federal government are possibly the ones that are the enemies of the U.S.

The fact that the politicians are all worked up about Russia basically providing Snowden with political asylum is amazing to me.  The U.S. provides political asylum to political activists from all over the world who would otherwise face persecution at home for their efforts to increase liberty and freedom of the citizens of their home countries.  How can they not see that this is all that Snowden did?

Maybe they just find the thought of putting him in their trophy case (pictured below) too exciting to see the hypocrisy of their position.

The shadow below will be filled in with the person who wants his country to follow its own Constitution, and he will stay there 23 hours a day until he dies.  What's the problem with that?  What would we think about this if it was happening in China or North Korea?

Consider this: Even a thug like Putin only tends to lock up those who embarrass him for 2-5 years.  When it can get away with it, the U.S. locks them up for life.

People often talk about the Daniel Ellsberg/Pentagon Papers case as if the strength of Ellsberg's moral position simply overwhelmed the government's desire to destroy him.  This isn't what happened at all.  It was only because the government had committed multiple felonies in trying to take Ellsberg down that the judge threw out the case because it became clear that basically none of the government's evidence had been properly gathered.  If the government had simply prosecuted Ellsberg in a more professional way, he would still be in federal prison serving his life sentence, even though the release of the Pentagon Papers was almost certainly a good thing for our country.

Mdraf wrote: It's chilling but just yesterday the House voted to continue the NSA program.

"Every country gets the Government it deserves" - Joseph de Maistre, French diplomat 1753-1821

I guess it turns out that the House Republicans are not quite as skeptical of the government as they tell their constituents that they are.

Hypocritical politicians.  Imagine that. 

MediumTex wrote:

Mdraf wrote: It's chilling but just yesterday the House voted to continue the NSA program.

"Every country gets the Government it deserves" - Joseph de Maistre, French diplomat 1753-1821

I guess it turns out that the House Republicans are not quite as skeptical of the government as they tell their constituents that they are.

Hypocritical politicians.  Imagine that. 

...except for MY Congressman who voted against - Isn't that the usual story? Everybody hates politicians except for theirs.

Mdraf wrote:

MediumTex wrote:

Mdraf wrote: It's chilling but just yesterday the House voted to continue the NSA program.

"Every country gets the Government it deserves" - Joseph de Maistre, French diplomat 1753-1821

I guess it turns out that the House Republicans are not quite as skeptical of the government as they tell their constituents that they are.

Hypocritical politicians.  Imagine that. 

...except for MY Congressman who voted against - Isn't that the usual story? Everybody hates politicians except for theirs.

Often there will be two or more votes on a piece of legislation with only one of them really counting (the others might relate to procedural issues, amendments, etc.).  A Representative can say that he voted for or against something, but when you actually look at the 2, 3, 4 or 5 votes that took place around that piece of legislation, it may be that he sort of voted for it, and sort of voted against it.  In other words, he can tell his constituents basically anything he wants to about most votes because no one really pays attention that closely.

Another thing that happens in the House is that Members will simply switch votes with one another.  If I am completely safe in my district opposing a piece of legislation but want to support it, and a guy somewhere else in the country is vulnerable at home on that issue and he wants to vote no but can't do it without getting heat back home, we can simply agree to switch our votes.  The vote count remains the same, but we are both suddenly provided with complete political cover, even though we are able to indirectly vote the way we wanted to vote in the first place (and our constituents never suspect anything).

***

Ever since I watched Idiocracy, I can't think about the House of Representatives without hearing in my head House of Representin'.

And BTW, since Idiocracy came out in 2006, the degree to which it has proven to be prophetic has been chilling.

Never heard of it. Now adding to Netflix...

Mdraf wrote: Never heard of it. Now adding to Netflix...

It's sort of the political equivalent of Office Space.

Terry Crews is outstanding as President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho

MediumTex wrote:

Mdraf wrote: Never heard of it. Now adding to Netflix...

It's sort of the political equivalent of Office Space.

Which isn't that surprising when you consider they had the same director...

Terrorists!  Terrorists everywhere!  That's why Boner and Pelosi had to join forces to form some demonic pact and continue their river dance on the Constitution.

Anti war.com...as sinister a domain name as ever I've heard. The FBI is wise to keep a close watch on the pacifists.

Mdraf wrote: Never heard of it. Now adding to Netflix...

a must see movie..

As the 21st century began, human evolution was at a turning point. Natural selection, the process by which the strongest, the smartest, the fastest, reproduced in greater numbers than the rest, a process which had once favored the noblest traits of man, now began to favor different traits. Most science fiction of the day predicted a future that was more civilized and more intelligent. But as time went on, things seemed to be heading in the opposite direction. A dumbing down. How did this happen? Evolution does not necessarily reward intelligence. With no natural predators to thin the herd, it began to simply reward those who reproduced the most, and left the intelligent to become an endangered species.

Libertarian666 wrote:

MediumTex wrote:

Mdraf wrote: Never heard of it. Now adding to Netflix...

It's sort of the political equivalent of Office Space.

Which isn't that surprising when you consider they had the same director...

Yes.

It's funny.  I remember when Office Space first came out and no one was all that excited or impressed.  A couple of years later, though, it was this huge cult classic and everyone had seen it.

When I first saw Idiocracy shortly after it came out I thought it was not nearly as good as Office Space, but now I think that it is really really really good.  One of the great ironies of Idiocracy is that part of its premise seems to be that it would take 500 years for the U.S. to elect an inexperienced young black President based solely upon his charisma.  The movie came out in 2006.

Crews' President Camacho is, however, actually one of the smartest stupid people in Idiocracy (and everyone in the movie is incredibly stupid except the time traveler from the present day, who is actually a present day moron, but finds that 500 years in the future he is the smartest man in the world).  As a President in his time and place, President Camacho does a pretty good job of leading the nation.  His accomplishments in the movie include convincing the public (against strong opposition) that plants grow better if you pour water on them rather than Gatorade.

MediumTex wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote:

MediumTex wrote: It's sort of the political equivalent of Office Space.

Which isn't that surprising when you consider they had the same director...

Yes.

It's funny.  I remember when Office Space first came out and no one was all that excited or impressed.  A couple of years later, though, it was this huge cult classic and everyone had seen it.

When I first saw Idiocracy shortly after it came out I thought it was not nearly as good as Office Space, but now I think that it is really really really good.  One of the great ironies of Idiocracy is that part of its premise seems to be that it would take 500 years for the U.S. to elect an inexperienced young black President based solely upon his charisma.  The movie came out in 2006.

Crews' President Camacho is, however, actually one of the smartest stupid people in Idiocracy (and everyone in the movie is incredibly stupid except the time traveler from the present day, who is actually a present day moron, but finds that 500 years in the future he is the smartest man in the world).  As a President in his time and place, President Camacho does a pretty good job of leading the nation.  His accomplishments in the movie include convincing the public (against strong opposition) that plants grow better if you pour water on them rather than Gatorade.

I would greatly prefer President Camacho to either the current president or his predecessor.

MediumTex wrote: Crews' President Camacho is, however, actually one of the smartest stupid people in Idiocracy (and everyone in the movie is incredibly stupid except the time traveler from the present day, who is actually a present day moron, but finds that 500 years in the future he is the smartest man in the world).  As a President in his time and place, President Camacho does a pretty good job of leading the nation.  His accomplishments in the movie include convincing the public (against strong opposition) that plants grow better if you pour water on them rather than Gatorade.

President Camacho: Now I understand everyone's shit's emotional right now. But I've got a 3 point plan that's going to fix EVERYTHING.

Congressman #1: Break it down, Camacho!

President Camacho: Number 1: We've got this guy Not Sure. Number 2: He's got a higher IQ than ANY MAN ALIVE. and Number 3: He's going to fix EVERYTHING.

I finally watched Idiocracy. Was fun. But all you need to do is go to the main entry page at www.yahoo.com and read the headlines to see we are there already

Mdraf wrote: I finally watched Idiocracy. Was fun. But all you need to do is go to the main entry page at www.yahoo.com and read the headlines to see we are there already

Screenshotted for posterity:

One of my favorite movies...

Rita: You think Einstein walked around thinkin' everyone was a bunch of dumb shits?
Pvt. Joe Bowers: Yeah. Hadn't thought of that.
Rita: Now you know why he built that bomb.

How many 8th graders (or adults for that matter) do you think could pass this 1912 exam today?

http://www.bullittcountyhistory.com/bch ... m1912.html

Mdraf wrote: How many 8th graders (or adults for that matter) do you think could pass this 1912 exam today?

http://www.bullittcountyhistory.com/bch ... m1912.html

I guess that was the exam given to the students who weren't working in the factories 16 hours a day back then.

I wonder what segment of society actually went to that school. 

Also, that wouldn't be a hard test if you had an entire school year to teach the students the answers to the questions.

Mdraf wrote: I finally watched Idiocracy. Was fun. But all you need to do is go to the main entry page at www.yahoo.com and read the headlines to see we are there already

Perhaps ironically, Idiocracy is itself an IQ test.