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.
One question I have pondered over the last few weeks is, why are the Democrats so determined to block Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court? Realistically, he is the most moderate nominee they are likely to see from the Trump administration. If his nomination fails, the president will most likely appoint Amy Barrett, who is secure against #MeToo allegations and is both more conservative and younger than Kavanaugh. So what is the point?
To some extent, the Democrats’ bizarre smear campaign against Kavanaugh is explicable on short-term political grounds. The Democrats’ crazed base demands that they #Resist, so resist they will, whether it does any good or not. But I think there is something deeper and more sinister at work...
I've seen it done in the workplace. Everybody makes dumb mistakes, but if somebody gets an angry, resentful, paranoid, or envious issue with you, you can be brought down without those mistakes.
A perennial bestseller by eminent mathematician G. Polya, How to Solve It will show anyone in any field how to think straight. In lucid and appealing prose, Polya reveals how the mathematical method of demonstrating a proof or finding an unknown can be of help in attacking any problem that can be "reasoned" out―from building a bridge to winning a game of anagrams. Generations of readers have relished Polya's deft―indeed, brilliant―instructions on stripping away irrelevancies and going straight to the heart of the problem
9:38 John said to him, "Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us."
9:39 But Jesus said, "Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me.
9:40 Whoever is not against us is for us.
9:41 For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.
9:42 "If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea.
9:43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than to have two hands and to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire.
9:45 And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than to have two feet and to be thrown into hell.
9:47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into hell,
9:48 where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.
9:49 "For everyone will be salted with fire.
9:50 Salt is good; but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another."
Sedentary lives increase appetite. What is "sedentary"? Less than 7 hrs/week of exertion. Not activity - exertion.
Why might it not matter? Because, as I have asserted in the past, in our world of abundance and temptation appetite has little correlation with nutritional needs in adults. In the world of nutritional scarcity in which our distant ancestors lives, it certainly did. Today, we have recreational feeding. It is fun.
There are many reasons why daily exercise is useless for weight loss. Among them is the fact that a daily hour of "cardio" or calisthenics does not require additional nutrition from one's normal habit. People who lift heavy two or three days/week probably can use 60-90 gms of protein daily for muscle repair.
People in serious training for physical competition are another category. A 2-3 -hour daily workout has different nutritional needs. Two hours daily of physical training sounds wonderful to me at this point in life. One hour in the gym and one hour of sports practice. Only college kids and the retired have that luxury.
With nutrition, best thing to do is to set goals for your desired fitness and functionality levels and to pursue those in a disciplined way. Same as everything else in life.
I find myself wondering what would drive a middle-aged woman to seek to destroy a splendid and honorable family man who she alleges attempted to grope her 35-37 years ago at a high school beer party? Seems evil to me. Lucky me, I guess, but I was testosterone-fueled when I was 17 but the gals seemed hormone-fueled too.
I doubt I can say anything new or add to what we already know or believe about Kavanaugh v. Blasey-Ford. But what has happened is concerning on so many levels. As a man, you worry about being viewed as 'tone-deaf' to women's needs or being hurtful of victims. As a woman, you will be questioned if you're not lined up behind the accuser simply because 'you know' what it's like. As a citizen, you worry about the clown show in Washington and the damage it is causing to the standards we have.
Living in the NYC region, I see and hear things the rest of the country has to hear (media center) but doesn't really want to. I get it in double-barreled doses, though. NYC really is a bubble of tremendous proportions. A friend of mine, today, told me he doesn't think Kavanaugh is fit for the Supreme Court, but not because of yesterday. He felt the Fox interview was weak and showed someone without great knowledge or understanding. Then he added, "His emotional outburst yesterday showed me someone who can't control his temperament." Basically, yes, it was about yesterday. Kavanaugh's background puts his other concerns to rest, but this is Progressive Central - the People's Republic of New York is taking shape.
Let's address the outburst. Kavanaugh's reaction was understandable. If I was held accountable for all the stupid things I did when I was 15, I think I'd probably go nuts. If I was being held accountable for something I know didn't happen, I'd be angry and ready to take on the world. Damn right I'd be pissed. The media is judging him poorly because of his emotions. His identity is now being carefully packaged as a person unable to control his anger. I think having to discuss my 15 year old farting would, on its own, piss me off.
My friend said "this appointment is bigger than yesterday." Yes it was. Now it's not. Now it is about yesterday. The Democrats chose a battlefield, spent two weeks preparing that field with full media support, failing to expect what happened. They expected the Republicans to cut and run. For once, the Republicans fought back. From my perspective, and I was never a huge Kavanaugh fan, I shifted my views. I thought he was barely an OK choice originally. Good background, solid credentials, but weak in areas that matter to me. The Democratic strategy made me realize he was an excellent choice. It wasn't about yesterday until it was. It certainly changed my view on his desirability, and I was sold. His identity is one of candid and thoughtful forebearance. Anger plays a role at the right time. But Kavanaugh never attacked his accuser. He showed sympathy and concern. He lashed out at the politics of identity utilized to smear him.
When Conservationists Kill Lots (and Lots) of Animals - Invasive species are sometimes trapped, poisoned, and shot in large numbers to save native species from extinction. Some scientists say the bloodshed isn’t worth it.
“The unthankful heart…discovers no mercies; but let the thankful heart sweep through the day and, as the magnet finds the iron, so it will find, in every hour some heavenly blessings!”~Henry Ward Beecher
My Senior VP has been in place for just over a year. He's made some changes to our team which are, without going into detail, good. He's altered many of the previous cultural differences between our department and others we work with, and has found a way to eliminate much of our own department's internal strife. Many of the changes he's made are superficial. Overall effectiveness and productivity is unchanged. He'd say morale and confidence of the group are higher. I wouldn't disagree, but it's a subjective opinion. My view has always been an efficient and productive department has the highest morale. People like be useful and productive. It carries its own rewards.
Still, I can't fault him for following the path he has. Either groupthink has set in (my view) or he's made real, tangible differences that will last. I'm a natural skeptic. People can feign behaviors for only so long, but I hope I'm wrong and he's right.
One behavior which he has instituted, however, has me cringing. Not because it's terrible. Not because it's wrong or subversive or disturbing in a broad sense. From my perspective, based on my own personality and 36 years of working, it's just uncomfortable and personally intimidating. Thank you is something for me and whoever I'm with. I'm curious to see what others think. I've shared this with many people and gotten many different responses.
I would have guessed that there would be a Gaussian distribution, but now I wonder about Pareto instead. The math of it is challenging for me, though. It's been a long time since I have used Functions.
Anyway, adult people do vary enormously in their energy levels, ambition, and physical determination. We all know that because it is obvious in the modern world wherein many people have choices of activity levels.
One thing that I am comfortable asserting is that a one hour workout daily (especially something like the Maggie's Routine) will increase your energy and drive to exert yourself. It works. Try it, if you disapprove of your slothfulness or lack of strength and physical endurance.
Much as we might wish that most things fit Gaussian "normal" distributions because it's easy to visualize, they do not. Some college-level math underpins the Pareto distribution, but more interesting than the income and wealth distributions it describes are all of the other psychological (including intelligence), geological, and other natural effects which it predicts.
Scott Adams d
Mathematician 
The Latest