We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, May 24. 2008
Who is wise? He who learns from every man.
Ben Zoma, from The Ethics of the Fathers
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Who is wise? Fear GOD find wisdom. BD do you really think I can learn something from some PC, multicultural, secular humanist, Fabian socialist bunch of assholes? Target practice maybe?
Funny how two folks can look at the same thing and see something totally different. I think the sentiments expressed above and at the link to be pretty good ones.
Luther, your posts are always interesting, informative and very wise. I believe from your posts that I have read that you are an aging wise, warrior lion. But I don't think all men can teach me something. I can not learn from evil men. What can I learn from an ax murderer, a pediophile, an arsonist, rapist, murderer, abortionist or any one who commits an eviil act? I aspire to learn from people who are good, kind, humble, and wise. Evil teaches me nothing but not to copy their actions. If that is the lesson I guess they have something to teach. But their lessons are not meant to be learned or meant to teach me anything. I guess that is the point I am trying to make, not all men can teach me something. Evil begets its own kind, there is no wisdom in evil.
You say there is no wisdom in evil. There is wisdom to be learned from it, though. It is a fool who does not recognize evil: Thus, it pays to learn what drives it and the various ways man incorporates it.
First off, thank you.
Meta has responded with what would have been a good portion of my answer to you.
In an effort to expound on what she wrote I have written several long paragraphs of bullshit. Which you will not see. :)
It really is all about knowing evil to defeat evil. It is not a type of wisdom that we seek out... but one which confronts us directly in our everyday world. We have to know what 'not' to be, as well as what 'to' be.
Words have a tendency to fall apart. If your pissed-off when you see a stick it's club. If your ankle is sprained it's a crutch. If the sun is shining on a glorious afternoon it's a fishing pole. It's always just a stick, but need and perspective change its purpose. A philospher or a debater might parse the language, but I think a wise man would empathize, reason and realize--that is, he would recognize the feeling of the communicator, know the context and the meanings of the words, appreciate the communicators understanding of the words and draw a conclusion which saw a whole rather than a part.
Might as well say, learn from the fool, rejoice in your cup of gruel, honor the jihadi, etc.
Not exactly off topic but I don't see where else to mention this..and it's more a jeremiad than anything.
I look at the 'Net , at the papers, TV , and one continuing battle we have been waging and losing since the mid 1960's is the Drug War. It has undermined all of South America, runs Afghanistan and many other countries and it's drive almost entirely by demand for drugs inside the USA
It's really kinda gett'n on my nerves that we don't have public hangings for dealers. It's gett'n on my nerves that we don't legalize it and tax it and have a special police corpse pick up squad to scoop up the dead junkies.
We're funding the worlds demise by our illegal drug usage and it's a battle we should have impose totally draconian measures on decades ago. Get caught with blow or crack...death sentence..period.
end of beef.
I go back and forth with myself on legalizing drugs. I think its basically a good idea, but my problem is who runs it. Should it be subject to the free market, with legal restictions, or should we let the behemoth federal government run it? If the government ran it, it would become a bureaucratic nest of waste and corruption. I don't think anyone should be in jail for possession pot.
who is giving Pelosi orders to subvert Colombia's war against the narcotraficantes, and why does it matter so much to them?
I swear, late at night, when everything is quiet, sometimes I start thinking about this congress, and how it party-lines behind some of most stupid and crooked and malign positions nigh imaginable, and i despair, i really despair. It's bad, it's really really bad. None of 'em are even pretending to be trying to pretend to try to tell the truth anymore.
They spout their lines with smirks on their faces, so that no one will think they're so stupid as to believe what's coming out of their own mouths.
All shame is so far gone it's as if it never existed in the first place, as if it was just a sweet dream we had once upon a time long ago, that our leaders might do wrong but if so it would be an honest mistake made while trying to do right.
But some of these things lately -- refusing to allow a vote on Colombia Free Trade, threatening to nationalize whole industries, screaming "oil is not the answer" to those who want to increase our supply (no? ok then put "the answer" in your tank for your commute in the morning) are not honest errors, are not any sort of policy that could be mentioned aloud, but are instead just wanton misgovernment -- misgovernment so bad it ought to be a CRIME.
GOOD GOD Y'ALL -- what are we gonna DO? What ARE we gonna do?
from the ''telling moment'' file, where a video is worth ten thousand words:
(or if you prefer youtube)
Congresswoman Maxine Waters has a slip of the tongue, using the word ''socialize'' to describe what liberals want to do to the petroleum industry. This word, clearly not to be used in front of the American people but clearly used often enough in her privy councils to've been waiting there on the tip of her tongue, once uttered, utterly flummoxes the congresswoman to the point that nearby staffers begin giggling in embarrassment, as if to say "oh oh, the boss used our secret word in public!"
take a look -- go ahead -- and take that step closer -- as many capital managers worldwide are beginning to do -- to disinvesting in the USA.
She can't find a word. Yet she swears she can find oil.
I'll say it a million times if I must..the Democratic Party is Marxist to depths of it's being. And if they win the entire enchilada we are in for hell because once the common man realizes it there will be shooting trouble.
When I read it now on site after site, on Market Watch's site for goodness sakes then you know the sans-culottes are coming for blood. Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry are with us, and the ghost's of the fallen we honor this week. They did not die for Marxism, but for liberty.
hell, habu, if we vote 'em into office, then the freaking marxists ARE democratic.
if we legally vote 'em control of the government, then vox populi has spoken.
whoever takes arms against that would be -- in that case -- fighting against liberty in order to fight FOR liberty. A contradiction in terms.
No, new revolutionaries can't present themselves as fighting for the people, if the people have elected the marxist targets of the revolution.
The new revolution will have to just fight for itself -- for its own --for, IOW, naked power.
the new revolution will have to break the rule of law in order to fight for the rule of law. It will be a jump through the looking glass.
well, let's just have a big [ht instap] IowaHawk HORSELAFF: