160-some Million More Reasons Floridians Shouldn't Vote Republican

 

"Ch-" by Herr D on heromachine. This really has happened to Herr D. Sportsmanship, fair play, and good character go together, but perhaps not in politics.-Shelob

 I get as peeved at Disney as anyone. You gotta wait 7 years to buy a movie if you don't get it the first time. They screw up history. Their anti-scandal contracts are unrealistically Draconian and wind up causing more harm and tabloid drivel than if they'd just not bothered. They overcharge. They're too exclusive. They bought the Muppets and pushed them downhill a little. They donated to Trump's campaign fund.

No one can replace Disney, though. Their imagineering and happy endings are sorely needed in this world. I mean really, Victor Hugo wrote 'The Hunchback Of Notre Dame' so depressing, Disney could only have improved it. Hugo had them hang the damn GOAT. Even the GOAT came to a bad end. A little unreality was a big improvement and helped with a central message of tolerance.

Not so with Republicans. The more unrealistic THEY get, the more awful and intolerant everything they're connected to becomes. They shut down Disney's tax bill and added it to the citizens of Florida.

Florida man (and woman) now owe taxes for Disney. Disney WAS  going to pay the bill. Not anymore! Republican governor DeSantis would rather try to control messages Disney puts out than treat his own state well.

Treating people badly is just par for the course for Republicans in charge though. It's what they do. They have brought so much ruin to me and mine and my country that I just don't see how anyone wants them. I'm baffled at the notion that anyone other than those receiving kickbacks, blackmail threats, and / or brainwashing can vote for them. How stupid IS half our nation? Differing opinions exist between experts. The IQ of Americans averages ten points below the worldwide population.

Shelob, that doesn't even sound stupid enough to explain what I'm seeing in the news. [exits]

Blackburn Does Not Burn Brightly, Says Herr D

 

Herr D's "TickTock TickTock TickTock" on heromachine.com. Blackburn has been described by some bloggers as 'cuckoo.' Herr D suggests she is a backward thinker.-Shelob

Can you analyze these statements? In order? Topic identified by titlebot.  [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

I don’t have very long But alright. Blackburn (R. Tenn.} tries to lay common ground, as if she’s going to make Judge Jackson vulnerable by making her think she identifies with her—the ‘R’ by ‘Blackburn’ on everything makes it clear she won’t more than she must.  [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

Then she casually jabs at the judge, pointing out Jackson approved of a ‘progressive’ curriculum. THAT’S NOT THE SAME THING AS A PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL AGENDA. A progressive curriculum is one that educates students with updated science and to their maturing needs.

Then she picks at the difference between pedophilia and child predator. Anyone who studies the matter long enough to talk publicly will learn the difference. We really shouldn’t insult people smart enough to read this blog with an explanation. Blackburn is obviously not qualified to write any legislation on this topic, though she claims she is. Presumably, the predatorial actions cannot be predated. That would be one way a pedophile would not be a child predator.

Yeah, this isn’t ‘Minority Report.’ We have to have a crime committed before we prosecute. Aren’t there a number of Republicans, including senators that ARE sex offenders? Yes. [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

Then she tries to say Congress will have her talk about things she’s not allowed to.

Then she picks at the difference between pedophilia and child predator AGAIN. Twice. Two different ways.

Judge Jackson is clearly better at suffering idiocy than I am.

When Blackburn said that the KIDS don’t understand, that is NOT ANYONE’S CONCERN. It was a pointless, stupid thing to say, which is probably why Jackson smiled. [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

There was a friendly question where Blackburn essentially asked Jackson a memory question and didn’t even elicit an opinion? Pointless. [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

Then Blackburn tries to get her to talk about things she’s not allowed to. Twice. [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

Then Blackburn ignores the results of a case, ignores half of what Jackson said in a particular instance and tries to make it sound like she meant the opposite of what she did say by quoting her QUOTING OTHER PEOPLE. Blackburn interrupts her twice, not letting her finish as soon as she begins to explain either time. Blackburn also claims she’ll run out of time and drags out her words to take up the time so Jackson can’t answer. [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

On the next question, Jackson restrategizes. She stops thanking Blackburn and simplifies her answer to a straight ‘no’ and expands only to say that she wasn’t talking about the same thing it’s claimed she was talking about. [presents snippet from Blackburn’s questioning of Jackson]

Then Blackburn says she’ll give Jackson a tough one in writing and plays to the camera that [the American people] “expect this of us.’ Blackburn admitted Jackson was gracious and jabs at some word choices while doing some more mild grandstanding.

I wish I could say that Blackburn is less intelligent, less well-spoken, less abrasive, less shallow, less false, and less statesperson-like than most of Congress. I’m afraid it’s the opposite. Subjective ratios preprogrammed correlate with your assessment. Unable to report upon swimming activities.

What? Blackburn’s shallowness cannot be verified. Her state is landlocked. All other assessments verified.

GOODBYE, Shelob. [exits]

Herr D Says Descartes Is Before De Horse

 

"Dragons Can't Eat Ice Cream" by Herr D. The time isn't right.-Shelob

You read Descartes twice before you were eight years old.

Yes? I guess I should add that at that age, if I didn’t know a word and couldn’t find it in a dictionary, I just did my best without it.

Did Descartes use many words not in dictionaries?

Not in mine. It was for twelve-year-olds. A lot of the geometry terms weren’t there. Some of the metaphysical terms weren’t defined well outside the context of his writing.

Do you recall your reaction to the Mind-Body Problem?     

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/descartes-and-the-discovery-of-the-mind-body-problem?utm_source=pocket-newtab

I don’t even remember the problem itself. I do know I disagree.

Which part do you disagree with?

All of the premises. First, I’d say that the mind can’t definitely be proven to be separate or as one with the soul. There’s some question for me as to the boundaries there. Animals, I don’t believe, have souls, but I do believe they have minds. Whales and dolphins might have souls too—I’m not sure. Then there’s the idea that minds don’t have a location—that’s stupid. If minds didn’t have a location, then ‘out-of-body’ experiences wouldn’t be any different from the rest of experience. Then there’s extension. Anyone who’s used a tool or a spreadsheet or a musical instrument until it felt natural knows that a person can extend their sense of self to include any functional thing they are using enough.

So you believe minds are physical.

No, I believe some metaphysical things have physical traits. It’s not very bright to assume that anything with traits automatically IS something. Some flus might have all the symptoms of food poisoning, but then they have more symptoms. So they AREN’T the same thing. Metaphysical means beyond, but shouldn’t automatically mean not including the traits of.

So, how would the mind and body be connected?

Who says they are? Maybe the mind is connected to the life generated BY the body. Maybe the mind simply inhabits the body as long as life generates it. Maybe a soul is only connected to the mind by God itself. We don’t know and can’t measure it. You know what that means?

No.

NOTHING. It doesn’t mean anything. There’s loads we can’t measure and maybe never will. We know that there’s some way the mind communes with the body, uses it, is connected to it, whatever. We know it’s there and can’t prove how. So what? That doesn’t change anything.

So your strategy is to leave the problem unsolved.

Until further notice, yes. Anyway, without better premises, it's useless to continue. It's premature to be blundering about with it.