Archive for January, 2006
Heard a Great Term This Past Weekend
Allen January 23rd, 2006
Feeding the sparrows through the horses.
Particular discussion was in regard to poverty programs and how much they truly help the poor.
It’s Like a USB Pen Drive Without the USB Pen
Allen January 20th, 2006
I came across a reference to FolderShare.com in a Getting Things Done Yahoo group post. It sounds interesting so I’m currently checking it out.
The software/system allows you to syncronize folders between two or more computers. Provisions are made for both Windows and Macs, but alas, not Linux.
Foldershare is now owned by Microsoft. I can’ help but wonder if they are positioning themselves to run against the supposed GoogleOS that I imagine will be very network centric.
As a note, I currently keep my GTDTiddlyWiki and OpenOfficePortable on my USB Pendrive. Other files may come and go, but those remain.
Konica Handle The Competition Anymore
Allen January 19th, 2006
I’ve been looking at upgrading our digital camera and have been waffling about which one to purchase. I read with interest that Konica Minolta Quits Photography Market. Given that that was one of the camera makers I was considering, I’m glad I waited.
Now I need to waffle about whether I want to not purchase one or to purchase one. Not purchase one because the support will be non-existantl. Purchase one because I usually don’t use tech support and the prices will probably be dropping off the table.
Perhaps now I can afford a digital SLR?
Tip: Read the title with a slight Scottish brouge.
Rights Given vs Rights Acknowledged
Allen January 17th, 2006
I’ve been reading about the Federalists vs the "Anti-Federalists" given the talk lately about the Federalist Society. I think it interesting in that one of the arguments against the Bill of Rights: The rights delineated would be seen as the only rights recognized by the Government. That once those rights were enumerated, the rest would be dismissed as not as important.
It is with that frame of reference that I read the following quote from Judge Alito: "I don’t think it’s appropriate or useful to look
to foreign law in interpreting the provisions of our Constitution. I think
the Framers would be stunned by the idea that the Bill of Rights is to be
interpreted by taking a poll of the countries of the world. The purpose
of the Bill of Rights was to give Americans rights that were recognized
practically nowhere else in the world at the time. The Framers…wanted
them to have the rights of Americans."
While I’m heartened by Judge Alito’s comments with regard to the influence of foreign law on US law, I found the phrase "The purpose
of the Bill of Rights was to give Americans rights that were recognized
practically nowhere else in the world at the time."
One of the founding principles of the American leaders at the time of the Revolution is that rights are inalienable and that those rights are not bestowed by a government. Rather the people give their consent to be governed and the rights of the government derives from the people — not the other way around.
Static vs Dynamic Behaviors
Allen January 10th, 2006
Having pondered about Mark Styen’s recent article It’s the Demography, Stupid, I find at Big Lizards the answer to some of my problems with Mark’s analysis. I’m not sure I will finish up my esssay. Said once is probably enough.
Read Steyn On Ice for a well-written response to Mark’s article.
What Happens When The Sword Is An ICBM?
Allen January 10th, 2006
First view this flag.
Then read Toying With Genocide @ AMERICAN DIGEST. This is one of those articles that I just sat and stared at the monitor after reading. Many unspoken thoughts are given voice.
"Can Islam be tamed?" is a very Western thought. Gerard first asks if this is the correct question (something to think about) and then asks what the West will do if the answer is "No."
Like Mark Styen’s recent article on demographics and Muslim societies, I’m still pondering this.
(And a lot of the reason why I’m posting so little lately. I’m spending more time mulling and pondering than actually writing. Plus the stupid laptop. Getting whiney here…)
The Parable of the New Samaritan
Allen January 5th, 2006
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
He answered: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all
your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. So he hurried immediately to Jericho where he and a group of friends petitioned the city council to create the Good Samaritan Rescue Foundation. The council responded that they didn’t have enough funds to pay for the Foundation and turned the man and his friends away. But rather than leave, they staged a sit-in where they took over the offices of the council.
“After several weeks, the council relented and passed a bill authorizing the creation of the Good Samaritan Rescue Foundation — with the funding for the Foundation to be determined later. The man and his non-governmental organization (Friends of the GSRF) started lobbying for the city council to raise taxes on the people of Jericho in order to properly fund the GSRF. After council elections the following year, they replaced the existing council members with ‘more compassionate and loving’ candidates who immediately raised the taxes on the local population from 10% to 25%.
“Funding now secured, the Samaritan applied for post of executive director and easily won the job. After hiring his friends, his first act was to appoint a task force to examine the needs of Jews traveling the highway from Jerusalem to Jericho. The task force met for several weeks at a local resort and determined that part of the problem was that the robbers were beating up the travelers because the robbers were scared of retaliation. Travelers had taken to carrying clubs as they traveled the road and the robbers were acting out of fear. And they were robbing because it was embedded into part of their culture.
“The council soon passed the ‘Jericho Highway Safety Act’ which banned private citizens from carrying clubs. They also appointed another task force to examine why the robbers hated the Jews and Samaritans so much and how to solve the problem in multi-cultural, diverse way. In order to pay for these two new mandates, the taxes were raised from 25% to 35%.
“Several years passed as the ranks of the GSRF swelled with more and more paid members. They soon formed a union, demanding council-provided health care and three-weeks of paid leave. The council, convinced that this was only the right thing to do, authorized these requested and raised the taxes from 35% to 50%.
“Unbeknownst to all of them, the man on the road had died several years earlier from his wounds.
“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
The expert in the law replied, “None of them.”
Jesus told him, “Exactly. Robbing others in order to enrich yourself in the name of helping others is not helping others.
“In fact, robbing others in order to really help others is not a neighborly act either. The person who was robbed was not allowed to perform a moral act of kindness. His money was taken from him without his consent. And the person robbing the first in order to take care of the second is not performing a moral act. The money was not his to give.
“While those in need might appreciate it, the gift is tainted. These tainted gifts will eventually lead them to think that foolish acts will not bear consequences.”
Piled Up Another 20 Draft Posts
2005 National Championship — They Call It Sooner Magic
Allen January 4th, 2006
"What do you mean," you ask yourself? The University of Oklahoma was not involved in the 2005 National Championship.
Besides, how can you, as a true Sooner, be happy that Texas won?
Easy — it’s a disputed win.
To the Trojans fans
Wow. Game over dude. You didn’t win and won’t get the two-in-the-row National Championship. And no, you didn’t win a National Championship two years ago. You weren’t in the National Championship game, so you can’t win a National Championship. And there went your winning streak. Sucks that you are loosing at least one, probably two great players next year.
To the Longhorns fans
Wow. Game over dude. You really didn’t win, you know that? Subtract out the six points from the not-really-a-touchdown and you lost. Yeah, you won on a technicality, but you know in your heart of hearts that it wasn’t really a true win. Sure you get Vince Young back next year. But hopefully the win by the Sooners next year (maybe, maybe) will crush any hope you have for next year.
My son wanted the Rose Bowl to experience an earthquake before the game and the football field to disappear. This is probably just as good.
UPDATE: Note to the trolls.
Already received one troll comment (to what is, admittedly a troll-ish essay) and denied entry. I will grant the commenter’s note that we got our "ASSES whuped" in the Texas game. I had problems reading the rest of the comment. Please wipe off the drool next time before posting.
Anyway, hope everyone realizes the posting was in fun. Most things in life are too serious to be taken seriously.
I do want to congratulate both teams on an excellent game. I want to thank Matt Leinert for the great comment at the end of the game. Definitely plays in to the master OU plan.
And you both know you really didn’t win the game, right?