HELICOPTER UPDATE
So, the maroon helicopter has gone by four times today. I got the number off the side of it (because it was THAT close) and it is a Fedex helicopter. I called the city's 311 number and asked them what a Fedex helicopter was doing buzzing the loop five times a day. They said it was a "drill" and they were aware of it. What kind of drill? They didn't know.
Are you kidding me? I think it's about time for Nancy Drew to get on the case, because there's something fishy going on here.
THE MAN WHO IS NEVER 100% RIGHT
Alan Keyes, lunatic, fanatic, Senate candidate has the transcript of last night's debate with Barrack Obama on his web page. In that debate, he did something fascinating, which to me shows why, even if he were sane and not a fanatic, I still could never take him seriously. Here is the transcript, cleaned up to remove meaningless material of an explanation about why gay and lesbian child-rearing would inevitably lead to incest (the complete, unedited transcript is here):
KEYES: Because it's actually very simple. I have, over here, two females--you know, I didn't talk about adoption--those two females are intent on having, quote, "having" a child, which they cannot have, obviously, unless you involve a male.
The procedures that are used now, by many lesbian couples, are procedures that mask the identity of the father, so it will not be known. OK? So it will not, and cannot, be known, who is the father of that child . . . [A] conscious, willful effort was made so that you could not know who was the biological father.
Once you have made that effort, you produce a child who cannot know who its father is. Cannot know that.
Now, if you don't know, and have no way of ascertaining, who your father is, then you can't know who your sisters and brothers are, obviously. And if you can't know who your sisters and brothers are, there is no way you could avoid having sexual relations with them. So, logically speaking-- In order to make an informed judgment, you must have the knowledge needed to avoid the consequence, and in that particular case, the knowledge is not available.
PONCE: (talking over) Quick response, Mr. Obama.
KEYES: It is quite logical.
OBAMA: I mean, according to Mr. Keyes, then, that would be true of any adoptions, where they often don't know who their parents are. It would be true any time an infertile couple gets a sperm donor to help them have a child. I think your logic wasn't that complicated. It was just wrong.
KEYES: The wonderful thing that one learns, when one deals actually with logic and philosophy, is that, when I have a point proven over here, the fact that that same point applies in an entirely different circumstance does not prove the error of my logic. It simply proves--
OBAMA: (talking over) It does prove it when you say that it's inevitable that they're gonna have (inaudible), which is what you said.
KEYES: It simply proves--excuse me. It simply proves that that logic may or may not exist elsewhere. If I have ascertained that a mistake is made over here, telling me that the same mistake may also be made over here, doesn't invalidate the logic which identified the mistake. And that's where you're having a problem.
OBAMA: (talking over) No, because you said it was inevitable, and that was entirely wrong.
End of transcript. See, Obama is wrong. Keyes is LOGICALLY correct that not knowing who your parents are (premise A) means you don't know who your siblings are (premise B), means you might inadvertantly sleep with a sibling (conclusion). The problem is, Keyes added a second conclusion unwarranted by the premises that this was "inevitable." Thus, when Obama says Keyes is "illogical" Keyes rightly, and smugly, points out that Obama is wrong about that, without addressing the second conclusion that is unwarranted. In other words, he is playing "lawyer ball" and acting like a buffoon. I bet he'd have a field day defining "is."
On the other hand, while there is zero, nada, no chance I will vote for this buffoon, I admire the fact that unlike his fellow pundits, he is willing to debate more or less fairly, not on his show, and open his ideas in public to retort. That is more than the jackasses on Fox, CNN, MSNBC, or the radio will do. This is what Jon Stewart called them out for, and what Alan Keyes is a standing indictment of them for.
WALKING DUDE
I have seen this guy who might, or might not be homeless talking to all of the cabbies by my building some mornings. He is all over the place, always walking. I just found out someone mad a movie of him. It is hilarious, and available on this blog.
FIVE DOLLAR MILK SHAKE INDEED
I think we all remember Vincent Vega’s reaction to the Five Dollar Milk Shake in Pulp Fiction. Forbes has put that into perspective with its list of most expensive restaurants. In the Chi, Charlie Trotter wins at $119 a head, while Tru is second at $107 per capita. These each include one glass of wine and tip. Apparently Masa in New York, a Japanese place, is about $366 per head, plus drinks. Forbes has a number of other “winners” including The French Laundry in San Francisco ($135 per), Tony’s in Houston ($64 per person), and Bastide in LA ($101 per). Detroit and Miami were also included, but Washington was not.
So, the maroon helicopter has gone by four times today. I got the number off the side of it (because it was THAT close) and it is a Fedex helicopter. I called the city's 311 number and asked them what a Fedex helicopter was doing buzzing the loop five times a day. They said it was a "drill" and they were aware of it. What kind of drill? They didn't know.
Are you kidding me? I think it's about time for Nancy Drew to get on the case, because there's something fishy going on here.
THE MAN WHO IS NEVER 100% RIGHT
Alan Keyes, lunatic, fanatic, Senate candidate has the transcript of last night's debate with Barrack Obama on his web page. In that debate, he did something fascinating, which to me shows why, even if he were sane and not a fanatic, I still could never take him seriously. Here is the transcript, cleaned up to remove meaningless material of an explanation about why gay and lesbian child-rearing would inevitably lead to incest (the complete, unedited transcript is here):
KEYES: Because it's actually very simple. I have, over here, two females--you know, I didn't talk about adoption--those two females are intent on having, quote, "having" a child, which they cannot have, obviously, unless you involve a male.
The procedures that are used now, by many lesbian couples, are procedures that mask the identity of the father, so it will not be known. OK? So it will not, and cannot, be known, who is the father of that child . . . [A] conscious, willful effort was made so that you could not know who was the biological father.
Once you have made that effort, you produce a child who cannot know who its father is. Cannot know that.
Now, if you don't know, and have no way of ascertaining, who your father is, then you can't know who your sisters and brothers are, obviously. And if you can't know who your sisters and brothers are, there is no way you could avoid having sexual relations with them. So, logically speaking-- In order to make an informed judgment, you must have the knowledge needed to avoid the consequence, and in that particular case, the knowledge is not available.
PONCE: (talking over) Quick response, Mr. Obama.
KEYES: It is quite logical.
OBAMA: I mean, according to Mr. Keyes, then, that would be true of any adoptions, where they often don't know who their parents are. It would be true any time an infertile couple gets a sperm donor to help them have a child. I think your logic wasn't that complicated. It was just wrong.
KEYES: The wonderful thing that one learns, when one deals actually with logic and philosophy, is that, when I have a point proven over here, the fact that that same point applies in an entirely different circumstance does not prove the error of my logic. It simply proves--
OBAMA: (talking over) It does prove it when you say that it's inevitable that they're gonna have (inaudible), which is what you said.
KEYES: It simply proves--excuse me. It simply proves that that logic may or may not exist elsewhere. If I have ascertained that a mistake is made over here, telling me that the same mistake may also be made over here, doesn't invalidate the logic which identified the mistake. And that's where you're having a problem.
OBAMA: (talking over) No, because you said it was inevitable, and that was entirely wrong.
End of transcript. See, Obama is wrong. Keyes is LOGICALLY correct that not knowing who your parents are (premise A) means you don't know who your siblings are (premise B), means you might inadvertantly sleep with a sibling (conclusion). The problem is, Keyes added a second conclusion unwarranted by the premises that this was "inevitable." Thus, when Obama says Keyes is "illogical" Keyes rightly, and smugly, points out that Obama is wrong about that, without addressing the second conclusion that is unwarranted. In other words, he is playing "lawyer ball" and acting like a buffoon. I bet he'd have a field day defining "is."
On the other hand, while there is zero, nada, no chance I will vote for this buffoon, I admire the fact that unlike his fellow pundits, he is willing to debate more or less fairly, not on his show, and open his ideas in public to retort. That is more than the jackasses on Fox, CNN, MSNBC, or the radio will do. This is what Jon Stewart called them out for, and what Alan Keyes is a standing indictment of them for.
WALKING DUDE
I have seen this guy who might, or might not be homeless talking to all of the cabbies by my building some mornings. He is all over the place, always walking. I just found out someone mad a movie of him. It is hilarious, and available on this blog.
FIVE DOLLAR MILK SHAKE INDEED
I think we all remember Vincent Vega’s reaction to the Five Dollar Milk Shake in Pulp Fiction. Forbes has put that into perspective with its list of most expensive restaurants. In the Chi, Charlie Trotter wins at $119 a head, while Tru is second at $107 per capita. These each include one glass of wine and tip. Apparently Masa in New York, a Japanese place, is about $366 per head, plus drinks. Forbes has a number of other “winners” including The French Laundry in San Francisco ($135 per), Tony’s in Houston ($64 per person), and Bastide in LA ($101 per). Detroit and Miami were also included, but Washington was not.
posted by David at 4:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home